On Oct 25, 2007, at 3:36 PM, seth vidal wrote:
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 12:31 -0700, Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
Now, on the X86_64 system, one will usually find both the i386 and
x86_64 libs installed. This is not a flaw or mistake, it is a
multilib
feature developed. This way, programs that have 64 bit
implementations can be used, but 32 bit programs that need the
audit-libs functionality can find it. The dynamic linker for
libraries looks in /usr/lib64 first, then /usr/lib.
yes, but the way this appears in rpm in Red Hat's implementation
is horribly nonintuitive. You have to go grokking for special
arguments to give rpm to figure out which package is which,
should you have a reason to operate on only one of them.
Most other distros have chosen to tag the package names in a
way that they can be identified visually; this is not "better"
in a technical sense but sure is easier to use.
Which is a good reason to list your installed pkgs using any of the
package managers that operate above rpm.
yum list installed
will output like this, for example:
yum.noarch 3.2.7-1 installed
yum-metadata-parser.i386 1.1.2-1.fc8 installed
So there's no doubt about which arch you have installed.
cat << GO_SYSIN_DD >> /etc/rpm/macros
%_query_all_fmt %%{name}.%%{arch} %%{version}-%%{release}
installed
GO_SYSIN_DD
$ rpm -q yum
yum.noarch 3.2.7-1.fc8 installed
Then there's no confusion about what "yum list installed" is actually
doing, or why yum chose to install multilib packages in the first place.
73 de Jeff
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
