rawhide report: 20080406 changes
jkeating at redhat.com
Sun Apr 6 20:32:52 UTC 2008
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 12:41 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> I am not sure but this may be even deliberate.
> Is libflashsupport.x86_64 used only by flash-plugin.i386 from
> Adobe? If yes that this would even made sense.
Yes, it's for adobe flash, which only comes i386. Sadly this is one of
those cases where we want libflashsupport there by default so that it
works when you install adobe flash (and we can't control their rpm to
add a requires on it), but also it has to be of the right arch, so now
we've got a bad situation. I'm going to talk to warren tomorrow and try
to get this fixed so that we're not forcing i386 packages onto people
who really don't need/want them on their x86_64 systems.
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20080406/6c06a6e9/attachment.bin
More information about the test