On 3 February 2010 19:10, Kennedy, Ryan <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
>

Look in your yum log for any package installations that might have
triggered it perhaps?

Might be an already installed package when updated had a dependency
that puled down the other bits.

I had that the other day and it was quite confusing initially when
java suddenly started responding with openjdk instead of Sun's
java.... turned out that ant used to have a jdk dependency but that
changed to openjdk specifically... so I had to work around that with
alternatives tec...

James

_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list

Reply via email to