FC5 x86_64 to FC6 asks for i386 dependencies

[Javier Perez]

On 2/18/07, Rolf Gerrits <rm.gerrits at quicknet.nl> wrote:
>
> Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>
> > Javier Perez writes:
> >
> >>
> >> This is weird
> >>
> >> So far, it looks like it is updating everything else properly, but I
> >> wonder if these i368 stuff may conflict with the x86_64 libs
> >
> >
> > They won't, but that's beside the point.  Something, somewhere, is
> > still screwed up.
> >
> > I nuked all i386 crap ages ago, and have kept FC 6 up to date for a
> > long time now, and not once did anything in i386-land tried to sneak
> > back in.  I can confirm that if all i386 stuff is properly removed,
> > you'll never see it again.
> >
> > Now, you have to be careful.  When you zapped all the i386 packages,
> > you should've taken some extra tender-loving-care to keep rpm happy.
> > Bug 223639 also gets triggered when removing an i386 package when an
> > x86_64 package remains installed.  I filed this bug against a slightly
> > different situation, but it applies equally well to this case.
> >
> > Now, presumably, the last i386 package you ended up removing was
> > glibc.i386. That's the last i386 arch rpm that gets nuked off, when
> > you're cleaning out all 32 bit stuff on x86_64.  All other i386
> > packages have a dependency on glibc.i386.  Now, I did not see
> > glibc.i386 in the list that you posted of packages that yum wanted to
> > install.  yum would not want to install those packages unless their
> > prerequisites -- of which glibc.i386 is certainly one -- are already
> > installed.
> >
> > So, I suspect that you still have both glibc.x86_64 and glibc.i386
> > installed.  I don't see how that would prompt yum into sucking down
> > more i386 crap, though, but, well, who knows.
> >
> > So, I think that you need to fumigate your box even further, but you
> > need to be careful doing that, keeping my bug in mind.  After nuking
> > glibc.i386, you'll probably find that "rpm -V glibc" will complain
> > that a crapload of locale files, man pages, and doc files will be
> > missing.  You'll need to reinstall the glibc.x86_64 to finish the
> > repair job, using "rpm -U --replacepkgs".  And you 'ought to do the
> > same for all other i386 packages that you nuked earlier; it's very
> > likely that the act of removing them also blew away any locale files,
> > man pages, and doc files that should not've been removed because they
> > were still owned by the x86_64 package.
> >
> >
> I did a fresh install from the FC6 x86_64  20070111 spin DVD  and got a
> massive amount of i386 besides the x86_64 that I was trying to install.
> I got rid of the i386 stuf by ways of  "yum remove *.i386"  .
> I did this in parts, like "a*.i386" plus its (i386)dependencies ......
> "b*.i386" plus its dependencies .... "c*.i386¨  ..etc.
> That went fairly quick all together and I think fairly safe too.
> I am now have x86_64 only rpm's installed.
>
> note, that this was a fresh install ... no native i386 rpms were involved
> !!
> note also, that there might be some files / directories left behind as a
> result of this..... but, I can live with that .
>
> Rolf
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>

Thanks
Let me see what happens.
I got rid of all i386 again, at least it does not show on
rpm -qa --queryformat '%{name}-%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}\n'|grep i386
or in
yum list *.i386

Nothing shows as installed on my system.

I will look on the config files, just to make sure nothing got lost.

Thanks!

-- 
------------------------------
/\_/\
|O O|  pepebuho at pananet.com
~~~~ Javier Perez
~~~~   While the night runs
~~~~   toward the day...
  m m   Pepebuho watches
    from his high perch.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20070218/0de94d72/attachment-0002.html