x86-64 rawhide update obnoxiousness

[seth vidal]

On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 08:23 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Steve Grubb <sgrubb at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday 11 October 2005 08:52, seth vidal wrote:
> > > Maybe I should add a routine where:
> > > if we're on a biarch machine and we're updating a package for one arch,
> > > check for the biarch package and see if it can be updated too.
> > 
> > I think that would be helpful. I cannot imagine anyone wanting to keep .i386 
> > & .x86_64 packages out of sync.
> 
> Agreed, I think that would go a long way toward solving the problem.
> 
> > Also, over time packages should become 64 bit clean and a .i386 version may no 
> > longer be required. Is there any way to spot .i386 packages that are no 
> > longer needed and can be removed?
> 
> That would be nice too.  As far as I can tell, though, the real problem
> is OpenOffice, which (1) is famously not 64-bit clean, and (2) drags
> most of the world along with it - it's not big enough on its own, after
> all.  I'm really hoping life gets simpler once OOo gets straightened
> out.

I _really_ like abiword and gnumeric. :)

hint hint

in extras.

extremely actively maintained.

:)

-sv