[Yum] kernel-source arch
thias at spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net
Tue Jun 15 13:49:52 UTC 2004
seth vidal wrote :
> > How about something like "exactarch=glibc kernel kernel-smp" being
> > recognized? There are actually few packages for which the wrong arch
> > can lead to disaster, and there are many more for which it's no big
> > deal(like gzip, or 3rd party packages going from i386 to i586 because
> > of enabled mmx stuff etc.). Just a thought.
> That's probably not a bad idea but it has two problems:
> 1. it makes the updates processing mind numbingly difficult to follow
In practise, it's more difficult than just "do as if we had exactarch=1 for
the packages listed, do as if we had exactarch=0 for all others?" when
going through the dependency resolving?
> 2. it's a change that can't be made in the current stable branch b/c it
> will change too many people's config files in midstream.
Why would this be so? If 0/1 still works (ok... there will be a non-working
corner case, if someone wants exactarch for only a single package called "0"
or "1" ;-)), and if the implicit default stays the same, then all existing
installations shouldn't see any difference unless the config is changed, no?
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora Core release 2 (Tettnang) - Linux kernel 2.6.6-1.427
Load : 0.13 0.27 0.24
More information about the Yum