Bug 437125
Summary: | Package move from noarch -> arch is not getting updated properly | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jesse Keating <jkeating> |
Component: | yum | Assignee: | Seth Vidal <skvidal> |
Status: | CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 9 | CC: | dcantrell, ffesti, james.antill, jhutar, katzj, pmatilai, tim.lauridsen |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2009-01-21 18:01:52 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
Jesse Keating
2008-03-12 15:18:52 UTC
is there also a perl-IO-Compress-Base-2.008-14.fc9.i386 in the repo? can you run: yum list updates on a system with ONLY perl-IO-Compress-Base-2.005-4.fc9.noarch installed? (In reply to comment #1) > is there also a perl-IO-Compress-Base-2.008-14.fc9.i386 in the repo? > In my scenario there was, but that was because I was using the static repos and adding both the i386 and the x86_64 repos. In the real world, that package does not appear to be multilib, yum list only shows the x86_64 one for me, unlike yum list perl which shows both the x86_64 installed one and the i386 available one. (In reply to comment #2) > can you run: > yum list updates on a system with ONLY perl-IO-Compress-Base-2.005-4.fc9.noarch > installed? > > It'll take me some time to recreate the scenario, I hope to be able to whilst testing beta candidates today. Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping we've done a lot of interesting changes in 3.2.20 that may impact this case. If you can test it w/3.2.20 it would be appreciated. closing this insufficient data - but I think the recent 3.2.20 changes fix a fair bit of this problem. |