[ATrpms-users] Re: problem with atrpm-kickstart rpm for x86_64

[Ben Root]

Thank you very much.  I have always been using yum, but only with up2date, never
from the command line.  I will also take a look into smartpm.

Ben Root



On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 01:00:44 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:

> 
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 04:01:39PM -0500, Ben Root wrote:
> > Hello, I first want to say that I find your site extremely useful, and it
does
> > make it easy to find things that I need.
> > 
> > I have a 64 bit system, and I use the atrpm kickstart rpm for the x86_64
> > architecture, and it installed just fine.
> 
> Unfortunatly apt does not support multilib systems:
> 
> http://bugzilla.atrpms.net/show_bug.cgi?id=334
> http://bugzilla.atrpms.net/show_bug.cgi?id=326
> 
> (the first entry has some workarounds)
> 
> This means that you cannot have apt on a system with overlapping i386
> and x86_64 packages. You either use another package manager (smart,
> up2date or yum), or you make your system non-multilib by removing all
> (overlapping) i386 packages. The latter will leave you w/o openoffice.
> 
> > However, a problem came up for me and took a while to figure out.
> > The /etc/apt/sources.list file points to the i386 files, making
> > apt-get report tons of errors.
> > 
> > Now, it may be that the rpm reconstituted the saved sources file
> > when I initially installed the incorrect version of the kickstart
> > rpm (which I removed immediately).  I don't know much about
> > packaging rpms, so, maybe this is an odd situation that can't be
> > fixed with the rpm packager, but I figured that it would be useful
> > to bring this to your attention.
> 
> Thanks for reporting. There is nothing we can do other than the
> workaround described above. apt developement has stalled in favour of
> the `smart´ package manager.
> -- 
> Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net