Bug 704538

Summary:	abrt should not include multilib libraries
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	Siddharth Nagar <snagar>
Component:	abrt	Assignee:	Jiri Moskovcak <jmoskovc>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	qe-baseos-tools-bugs
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	6.2	CC:	ahecox, dfediuck, dvlasenk, gavin, james.leddy, kklic, npajkovs, rvokal
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-08-03 14:23:06 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Siddharth Nagar 2011-05-13 14:18:27 UTC

Description of problem:
abrt on x86_64 should not install abrt-lib.i686 and other 32-bit libraries.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
abrt-1.1.16-3.el6.x86_64

How reproducible: 
Always



Steps to Reproduce:
$ rpm -qlp abrt-libs-1.1.16-3.el6.i686.rpm
/usr/lib/libABRTUtils.so.0
/usr/lib/libABRTUtils.so.0.0.1
/usr/lib/libABRTdUtils.so.0
/usr/lib/libABRTdUtils.so.0.0.1
/usr/lib/libbtparser.so.1
/usr/lib/libbtparser.so.1.0.1

We pull in packages as multilib when they contain files matching /usr/lib/*.so.*

  
Actual results:


Expected results:
We should not be installing the i686 rpm.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Jiri Moskovcak 2011-05-31 13:15:31 UTC

The example above looks fine to me

/usr/lib/*.so.* should match the i686 package

/usr/lib64/*.so.* is probably what you're looking for

Maybe I just don't understand it, can you please be more specific about what you're trying to achieve?

Comment 2 Radek Vokál 2011-06-10 08:16:43 UTC

Sidharth, can you provide more info. Is 64 abrt-core package pulling in 32bit abrt-libs? I haven't reproduce that on my box.

Comment 3 Jiri Moskovcak 2011-08-03 14:23:06 UTC

ABRT2 is now in rhel6 repos and this bug shouldn't be there (at least I can't reproduce it) so I'm closing this, feel free to re-open it, if you have some new information.