[Spacewalk-list] i386 vs. x86_64

[Kennedy, Ryan]

I'm still a bit unclear on this.
Here's an example...
When I kickstarted my CentOS 5.4 x86_64 test box from Spacewalk it installed dbus-1.1.2-12.el5_4.1.x86_64 by default, but NOT the i386 version.  As I mentioned, it didn't show an available update for dbus for a few weeks (I already had this system managed and the channels configured and reposync'd when I kickstarted it).  Just a few days ago though it started listing a bunch of i386 updates along with the other 15 updates it had been showing for a couple of weeks.  The i386 version of dbus (dbus-1.1.2-12.el5_4.1.i386) is identical to the x86_64 version so I am confused as to why it didn't just install it when the system was kickstarted.  Is it possible that something I installed had an i386 lib as a dependency that triggered this?  I don't recall installing any packages specifically on that box, but that's not to say I didn't.  I just can't think of another logical explanation as to why all the i386 packages just started showing up for that system.

Also... this isn't a library so I don't know why it would think it would need the non-64bit version of this package.  Puzzling.

--Ryan

-----Original Message-----
From: spacewalk-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:spacewalk-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of James Hogarth
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 11:43 AM
To: spacewalk-list at redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] i386 vs. x86_64

On 2 February 2010 17:06, Kennedy, Ryan <rkennedy at paml.com> wrote:
> I set up my channels to all use x86_64 and I have a system or two I kickstarted using those channels.  Initially it showed about 15 packages that needed updated and all of them were x86_64, but just the other day (seemingly out of the blue) that number more than doubled and now I am seeing both i386 and x86_64 versions listed as needing to be updated on the client.  I can see that my local satellite repo on my spacewalk server has both i386 and x86_64 versions of the packages in question which seems a bit odd considering my channels/repos are all set to x86_64 for architecture.  Can anyone set me straight on this?  It is puzzling to me why it would only show x86_64 packages in the updates for several weeks and then all of a sudden show i386 version of the same packages as well.
>
> --Ryan
>
> DISCLAIMER:
> Information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential.
> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, be notified
> that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> strictly prohibited. If this communication is received in error, please
> notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting
> from your computer. Thank you
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spacewalk-list mailing list
> Spacewalk-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
>

64bit Centos machines by default will have a selection of 32bit
packages as well (mostly libraries) for compatibility... depending on
your environment you may not need these. My systems, for example, just
have @base which includes a few i386 packages but specifically firefox
x86_64 from the mharris repo.... You will also find noarch for some
bits in your x86_64 channel.

James

_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-list mailing list
Spacewalk-list at redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
DISCLAIMER:
Information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential. 
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, be notified 
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is 
strictly prohibited. If this communication is received in error, please 
notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting 
from your computer. Thank you