Re: Why both i386 and X86_64

[Joshua Jensen <joshua@xxxxxxxx>]

Because you may have some 32bit binaries that need to use those 32bits
libs/whatever... hence having some of the basic packages exist in both
bit-length versions.

Joshua


On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:14:02PM -0500, Bob Chiodini wrote:
> I'm new to this list and the AMD 64 bit architecture and noticed during
> today's update of hal and associated dependencies that both the i386 and
> x86_64 RPMs were installed.  This does not seem to be the case for all
> RPMs.  hald is ELF 64-bit, so I'll assume the correct one is running.
> 
> Why both RPMs?
> 
> >From yum:
> 
> Transaction Listing:
>   Update: hal.i386 0:0.4.7-1.FC3
>   Update: hal.x86_64 0:0.4.7-1.FC3
>   Update: hal-devel.x86_64 0:0.4.7-1.FC3
>   Update: hal-gnome.x86_64 0:0.4.7-1.FC3
> Downloading Packages:
> hal-0.4.7-1.FC3.i386.rpm  100% |=========================| 155 kB    00:15
> hal-0.4.7-1.FC3.x86_64.rp 100% |=========================| 171 kB    00:11
> hal-gnome-0.4.7-1.FC3.x86 100% |=========================|  78 kB    00:08
> hal-devel-0.4.7-1.FC3.x86 100% |=========================|  98 kB    00:07
> Running Transaction
> Updating: hal 100 % done 1/8
> warning: /etc/hal/device.d/50-fstab-sync.hal created as /etc/hal/device.d/50-fstab-sync.hal.rpmnew
> Updating: hal 100 % done 2/8
> Updating: hal-gnome 100 % done 3/8
> Updating: hal-devel 100 % done 4/8
> Completing update for hal  - 5/8
> Completing update for hal  - 6/8
> Completing update for hal-gnome  - 7/8
> Completing update for hal-devel  - 8/8
> 
> Updated: hal.i386 0:0.4.7-1.FC3 hal.x86_64 0:0.4.7-1.FC3 hal-devel.x86_64 0:0.4.7-1.FC3 hal-gnome.x86_64 0:0.4.7-1.FC3
> Complete!
> 
> Bob...
> 
> -- 
> 
> amd64-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list

-- 
Joshua Jensen
joshua@xxxxxxxx
"If God didn't want us to eat animals, why did he make them out of meat?"

-- 

amd64-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list