On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 03:22:37PM +0100, David Bolt wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Michael Schroeder wrote:-
> 
> >On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:13:35PM +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> >> On 2007-10-25 13:06:59 +0200, Peter Czanik wrote:
> >> > Well, in this case I would not need to enter a blocker bug for openSUSE
> >> > 10.3 ppc32 just a few minutes ago (
> >> > https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=336678 ). The problem is,
> >> > that 64bit packages are installed on a 32bit system, and render it
> >> > practically useless, especially when it comes to on-line updates...
> >>
> >> that is a yast bug and not an RPM bug.
> >
> >It's probably not even a bug in yast. I think he has installed the
> >"64bit" pattern.
> 
> I don't have the 64bit pattern installed, since I only have a G3.
> However, I also have several 64bit packages installed. What's more, I
> can't remove them without causing a lot of broken dependencies. I've
> added the details here:
> 
> <URL:https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=336678#c1>

This is due to some PAM requirements conceptional misunderstandings.

We have to have both 32bit and 64bit PAM modules usually and this bled
into requirements of some packages. 

Ciao,M


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to