[rhelv6-list] question about firefox 32- vs. 64-bit RPMs in rhel-6-server-rpms and rhel-6-server-optional-rpms repos
Horst Severini
hs at nhn.ou.edu
Thu Nov 8 16:20:02 UTC 2018
Hi again,
I just saw another reply from Cale in the archive, which I also didn't
get. Why am I not getting emails from a thread that I started, while I'm
getting all others (like the EPEL thread earlier today)? That seems very
strange.
Anyway, Cale's reply:
> It certainly seems that RedHat has moved the Firefox 32-bit client
> updates from the server repository to the optional as any server I
> have which is not subscribed to rhel-6-server-optional-rpms will also
> find the old firefox-31.1.0-5.el6_5.i686 package. I also recall
> noticing that one of my servers wanted to switch over to the i686
> version on an upgrade but I can not recall what I did to fix it, and
> that same server performed the upgrade to 6.10 without that being an
> issue. Perhaps a 'yum clear all' would help as that is the only thing
> I can think that I would have done to resolve it?
I tried 'yum clean all', but I don't think that has any effect here,
since it still sees the 32-bit firefox RPM, and therefore any update
where the 32-bit firefox appears in rhel-6-server-optional-rpms before
the 64-bit firefox appears in rhel-6-server-rpms will cause it to revert
back to 32-bit.
Can that be fixed in the repos?
Ah, I finally got Cale's reply email, great! Thanks again!
Cheers,
Horst
On 11/8/18 9:57 AM, Horst Severini wrote:
> Thanks Marco!
>
> I just looked at the archive, and there is a reply from solarflow99 las
> Friday, which I for some reason never got!
>
> > in the yum repo file it usually has a $basearch in the URL
>
> Yes, I see that in all the URLs in /etc/yum.repos.d/redhat.repo, but
> it's not clear to me where/how that is set. It's presumably set to
> x86_64, though, since these are all 64-bit servers:
>
> [hs at ouhep5 ~]$ uname -a
> Linux ouhep5.nhn.ou.edu 2.6.32-754.6.3.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Sep 18
> 10:29:08 EDT 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> [hs at ouhep5 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release
> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.10 (Santiago)
>
> But in a 64-bit server, there are plenty of 32-bit RPMs -- which are of
> course necessary -- and firefox is one of the ones which come in both
> flavors, so I'm not sure why the rhel-6-server-rpms repo only contains
> the 64-bit version (plus a really old 32-bit version), while the
> rhel-6-server-optional-rpms repo only contains the 32-bit version. That
> seems like an oversight.
>
> Who is in charge of these repos? I would think that firefox should be in
> one or the other, but not both -- and particularly not different flavors
> in each?
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Horst
>
> On 11/8/18 9:22 AM, Marco Shaw wrote:
>> Received. Archives here:
>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-list/
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 10:59 AM Horst Severini <hs at nhn.ou.edu
>> <mailto:hs at nhn.ou.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> I never received any response to this email. Are my emails going
>> through
>> to the list at all? I never even got my own email back.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Horst
>>
>> On 10/31/18 7:47 PM, Horst Severini wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > we noticed that on our 64-bit RHEL6 Server nodes, whenever there's
>> > a firefox update, the 64-bit firefox RPM is being replaced with an
>> > updated 32-bit RPM. I dug a little deeper, and I think the issue
>> > might be that while there are both 32- and 64-bit versions
>> > in the rhel-6-server-rpms repo, only the 32-bit version is
>> > in the rhel-6-server-optional-rpms.
>> >
>> > At least that's what I gather from the output of 'yum list
>> firefox':
>> >
>> > Installed Packages
>> > firefox.x86_64 60.3.0-1.el6 @rhel-6-server-rpms
>> > Available Packages
>> > firefox.i686 60.3.0-1.el6
>> rhel-6-server-optional-rpms
>> >
>> > Actually, it's even weirder than that. If I uninstall firefox,
>> > then I get this:
>> >
>> > yum --disablerepo=rhel-6-server-optional-rpms list firefox
>> >
>> > Available Packages
>> > firefox.i686 31.1.0-5.el6_5
>> rhel-6-server-rpms
>> > firefox.x86_64 60.3.0-1.el6
>> rhel-6-server-rpms
>> >
>> > yum --disablerepo=rhel-6-server-rpms list firefox
>> >
>> > Available Packages
>> > firefox.i686 60.3.0-1.el6
>> rhel-6-server-optional-rpms
>> >
>> > Is there a reason for that? I would've expected that either both
>> of them
>> > should be provided by and updated in the same repo, or there
>> should only
>> > be a 64-bit version at all, like there is for thunderbird:
>> >
>> > yum list thunderbird
>> >
>> > Available Packages
>> > thunderbird.x86_64 52.9.1-1.el6
>> rhel-6-server-optional-rpms
>> >
>> > Is there a way to fix this in the repos? If not, what would be
>> the easiest
>> > way to fix it on the client side? I suppose I could add some
>> 'exclude=firefox'
>> > statement to the [rhel-6-server-optional-rpms] section in
>> > /etc/yum.repos.d/redhat.repo, but I was hoping I didn't have to
>> resort
>> > to a hack like that.
>> >
>> > Or are there other yum priority tweaks that could address this?
>> >
>> > The weird thing is that during a fresh install, it picks the
>> 64-bit version,
>> > so I'm not sure why an updated 'favors' the 32-bit version. Maybe
>> > rhel-6-server-optional-rpms is updated before rhel-6-server-rpms,
>> > and therefore the 'yum update' can only find the updated 32-bit
>> version,
>> > and therefore chooses that one?
>> >
>> > Thanks a lot,
>> >
>> > Horst
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rhelv6-list mailing list
>> rhelv6-list at redhat.com <mailto:rhelv6-list at redhat.com>
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rhelv6-list mailing list
>> rhelv6-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
>>
>
More information about the rhelv6-list
mailing list