RE: package manager for RHEL?

[seth vidal <skvidal fedoraproject org>]

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.

-sv