Re: yum losing it´s flavour?

[Arthur Pemberton]

On 9/23/06, Ric Moore <wayward4now at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 21:03 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> > There is currently no known major problem with yum.
> Arthur, you have seem to a grasp of it all things yum, so I'll ask ya,

I can lay no claim to no such praise. Quite the contrary actually.
However, I use yum regularly, and I am regular in the Fedora chatroom
and mailing list. That is to say, if there was a known major problem
with yum, I would be aware of it.

> I can grasp an i386 rpm, meaning it a common denominator 32 bit rpm.
> I've not seen i486 rpms, but they surely existed at one point.
> It's preferable to use an i586 rpm if you have an i586 processor over
> the i386 one, correct? Assuming you have an i586 kernel?
> An i686 rpm, is it for 64 bit processors running 32bit? or a prebuilt
> rpm for 64 bit?

Of this I am not sure, although it feels wrong. Your question would be
better served by Googling or by opening up a new thread. . . sorry.

>
> I have an Athlon64 3200 running 32 bit FC5 (yeah, I'm still chicken) and
> I'm seeing a kernel for i686 being yum updated. My updated nvidea
> modules was an i586. It no longer works. <grins> Fill me and anyone else
> as being merely ignorant, would you please? Ric
>

I don't thnk i686 implies 64bit. I think that owuld be i64 (I could be
mistaken). I have a 32bit CPU, but i have an i686 kernel, as chosen by
yum.

Good luck.

-- 
Fedora Core 5 and proud