Bug 248884
| Summary: | Removing i386 evolution in a x86_64 system removes translations. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Gustavo Maciel Dias Vieira <gustavo> |
| Component: | rpm | Assignee: | Matthew Barnes <mbarnes> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 7 | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2007-08-13 05:54:11 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
Gustavo Maciel Dias Vieira
2007-07-19 13:14:41 UTC
Just curious, how did you wind up with both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of these packages installed? I have no idea. Just did a very standard F7 installation. You know, I was asking this very same question just before I removed the packages. My last theory was that they were standard because of binary only Evolution plugins... Unfortunately, I only have one x86_64 machine, so I can't check if this is a situation somehow special of this installation. A colleague suggested the i386 and x84_64 versions may have been different, such as evolution-2.10.2-2.fc7.i386 and evolution-2.10.3-1.fc7.x86_64. I don't think there's anything I can do about this. Fedora is not designed to have the same application installed twice for different architectures. We support that for libraries, but not applications. It sounds like your system was just in a weird configuration. I suggest applying the workaround you mentioned to any other applications that got installed twice. I checked the installation log for my system, some findings: Both i386 and x86_64 versions were the same, since installation, through all updates, up to the point I removed them. My anaconda-ks.cfg shows that I have not explicitly asked for the i386 versions to be installed. The install log shows they were. There is one exception to your rule that applications are not designed for multiple archs: Firefox. Both Firefox i386 and x86_64 are installed by default and I actually use both (i386 only for Java plugin). Anyway, thanks for checking this problem. It's clear now this isn't a Evolution problem. But, I still like to pursue it further. Should I file it under anaconda? Do you recommend another module? I'd start with anaconda. I can't think of anything else that might be at fault. For the record: I created bug 248911. This is entirely normal; the translations shouldn't be getting removed, though |