Bug 206927

Summary: use multi-arch yum repos instead of multilib x86_64 trees
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Jens Petersen <petersen>
Component: distributionAssignee: Bill Nottingham <notting>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Bill Nottingham <notting>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: dcantrell, jonstanley, katzj, rvokal
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: FutureFeature
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-12-01 21:42:59 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Jens Petersen 2006-09-18 09:16:03 UTC 
Description of problem:
I suggest dropping i386 packages from x86_64 trees in the next release.
It would be simpler just to use separate yum repos for x86_64 and i386.
Current fc6 x86_64 seems seems to multilib a large part of the distro.

Additional info:
On my main machine running x86_64 fc5 I current added updates-i386,
extras-i386 (and livna-i386) repos and it seems to work just fine.
Comment 1 Jesse Keating 2006-09-18 13:11:42 UTC 
I'm pretty certain that there would be some conflicts if this were done.  not to
mention that the CD size for x86_64 would double to 10 CDs, entirely way too much.

Bill, any thoughts?
Comment 2 Bill Nottingham 2006-09-18 17:41:56 UTC 
I think it's probably too late for FC6 to do this. It will lead to conflicts in
the repo itself post-install; if the user never tries to install certain
packages, they won't hit, but they will be there.
Comment 3 Jeremy Katz 2006-09-18 17:53:20 UTC 
Yeah, there are lots of dragons in doing this -- there are packages which aren't
multiarch safe and so trying to do this will just cause conflicts for users.
Comment 4 Jon Stanley 2008-05-12 21:32:36 UTC 
Is this worth even attempting?  My vote is no.  As far as space on the mirrors,
the content is hardlinked, so that's moot. There just seems to be more heartache
and pain here than it's worth to me.
Comment 5 Bill Nottingham 2008-05-13 00:18:21 UTC 
To do this properly requires doing multilib (essentially) via a yum plugin of
some sort. It hasn't been tried yet.
Comment 6 John Poelstra 2008-07-03 23:40:10 UTC 
triaged
Comment 7 Bill Nottingham 2008-12-01 21:42:59 UTC 
For now, we're not doing this.