Folks: Wasn't really complaining. Just wanted upstream people to know in case they were interested.
For clarity, The 686 8n-1 openssl gets installed on both the XO-1 and the XO-1.5. After a fresh install: Doing a one-step yum update on the XO-1 upgrades it to the 8n-2, but installs the 586 version Doing a one-step yum update on the XO-2 upgrades it to the 8n-2, but installs the 686 version In our deployments we always try to do it in two steps, a yum update download-only to an SD card, then yum localinstall from the card, to save internet usage. In this two-step localinstall scenario, the XO-1 updated chosen (586) actually refuses to update the installed older, but 686, version. On the XO 1.5, there is no issue - the 686 8n-2 updates the installed 686 8n-1 Peter, absoulutely the right rpm switches can be used instead of yum to get the desired one there when not doing a direct update. The other yum methods are dangerous or ineffective since on the XO-1,a yum reinstall wont pick up the original package, and a vanilla yum remove would delete about 3.5 million dependencies. That said, if I copy the 686 8n-2 rpm over to the XO-1 downloaded updates on the SD, when doing the localinstall, it works fine. So, I am not complaining, I was more or less curious as to why a 686 was in there at all, since all the rest of the stuff int the package list seems to be 586, and there is a 586 openssl available. Perhaps, I too much love simplicity :-) But, in conclusion, I'm all good here. If there is a specific bias for one or the other (586 or 686) package, just let me know and I can make both the XO-1 and the XO 1.5 happy with that version. PS: Martin, we haven't deployed 852 in Kenya so I hadn't seen this before in 10.1.2. We'll be upgrading them all from a mixed XO-1 set of 711 and 802; and the 1.5's with 205/206 both of which never had the 686 installed. So, in preparation of when we go back in March, we're working with 10.1.3/3xx assuming that it will be the new signed build generation. Cheers, KG On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Peter Robinson <[email protected]>wrote: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Martin Langhoff > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Kevin Gordon <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Any reason that the openssl 0.9.8n-1.fc11 is of the 686 architecture as > >> bundled in the os360 packages? Causes a bit of grief on localinstalls > and > > > > This was also on 10.1.2 as can be seen in the link below . The > > compaints are bogus my understanding is that -- Fedora keeps its i686 > > builds compatible with Geode. Why is yum getting confused I dunno -- > > perhaps it's reading the kernel uname. On XO-1 builds, the kernel is > > i586. > > > > > http://download.laptop.org/xo-1.5/os/official/os852/4GB/os852.packages.txt > > > > cheers, > > I don't think the change to the rpm arch file that made geode i686 > capable was made until post F-11 (F-12 from mem) so I think you need > to add a command to rpm to use the i686 version or install the > i586/i386 variant. > > Peter >
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
