Bug 458300
| Summary: | strace multilib in rawhide, conflicts on upgrade from F9 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Matt Domsch <matt_domsch> |
| Component: | distribution | Assignee: | Bill Nottingham <notting> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Bill Nottingham <notting> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | dcantrell, katzj, poelstra, roland, rvokal |
| 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: | 2008-10-24 18:51:12 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 438943 | ||
|
Description
Matt Domsch
2008-08-07 15:18:08 UTC
If there is a problem here at all, it is not an strace issue, just a distro issue. If you simultaneously upgrade to the same strace-V-R for both i386 and x86_64, then there is no problem. If you had both arch rpms installed under F-9, I don't think that was done by normal distro means, since the x86_64 install image and repos do not contain strace.i386 rpms. The report failed to show the actual conflict, which was a bad omission. I tried it myself using rpm by hand (since there is no canonical distro way to make this happen AFAICT), and got the conflict on the man page file. That differs because it changed between upstream strace versions, as you might expect. strace only existed for the base arch in Fedora 9 (AFAICT). The same is true in F10. Closing; I'm curious how you got both arches installed under F9. |