x86_64 bug
Jan Engelhardt
jengelh at computergmbh.de
Tue Mar 4 16:06:09 PST 2008
On Mar 4 2008 20:27, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
>
>> when there is a package A at x86_64 that is being obsoleted by B, then
>> smart will install both B at i586 and B at x86_64, which is really wrong IMHO.
>
>Yes, that's wrong, and that's not what the stock Smart should
>normally do in that situation. Can you please provide the output
>of "smart --explain upgrade" when you see this situation again?
01:10 ccgmbh:../packages/RPMS # rpm -Uhv a-0-0.x86_64.rpm
Preparing... ########################################### [100%]
1:a ########################################### [100%]
01:10 ccgmbh:../packages/RPMS # smart install b
Loading cache...
Updating cache... ######################################## [100%]
Computing transaction...
Upgrading packages (2):
b-0-0 at i586 b-0-0 at x86_64
2.3kB of package files are needed.
Confirm changes? (Y/n):
Saving cache...
01:10 ccgmbh:../packages/RPMS # smart install --explain b
Loading cache...
Updating cache... ######################################## [100%]
Computing transaction...
Upgrading packages (2):
b-0-0 at i586
Upgrades:
a-0-0 at x86_64 (upgraded)
Conflicts:
a-0-0 at x86_64 (upgraded)
b-0-0 at x86_64
Upgrades:
a-0-0 at x86_64 (upgraded)
Conflicts:
a-0-0 at x86_64 (upgraded)
2.3kB of package files are needed.
Confirm changes? (Y/n):
BTW, the Conflicts is also wrong I guess, but that may be
an implementation detail of smart.
More information about the Smart
mailing list