On Tuesday 17 February 2004 19:08, Sam Varshavchik wrote:Gene C. writes: > Yes but .. > > The practical matter is that you do need repository pointers to both > x86_64 and i386 respositories in the general case. Updates for the gcc, > glibc, XFree86, etc. packages which include both x86_64 and ix86 packages > in the FC1 x86_64 distribution will require both sets of repositories. > > Hopefully, FC1 x86_64 final will be coming out shortly and that should > fix a lot of this stuff.
Pointing up2date to a copy of the i386 update channel did resolve that dependency, but it then complained about an unresolved dependency on libgl.so, which I believe is a known issue.
Still, this just feels wrong. The x86_64 channel should include any necessary i386 stuff.
Don't disagree ... don't agree. What this comes down to is that I do not know what the "right" answer is.
The Opteron/Athlon64 offers a interesting environment where both 64 bit and 32 bit userlan application can run concurrently on the same hardware under the same OS. This is creating an "interesting" situation for creating a x86_64 distribution.
From a packaging perspective this is no different than i686. On FC1 i686you have stuff - like glibc, that contains both i686 and i386 components. Everything gets stuffed into a single update channel, and everything works well.
If you look in the archives for fedora-test list (or fedora-devel-list, I forget which), there is some discussion on how rpm "does the right thing". It is still not clear to me how to make sure that the "right thing: is done installing packages post system installation/creation.
Description: PGP signature