Since ppc64 debuginfo files are segregated from ppc ones
for some reason, fedora-rawhide.repo needs to add something
other than $basearch as an alternative debuginfo repository.
See also bug #170986.
I have not determined whether this same problem exists for
releases (f11/f12), but it very welly might for ppc*.
Debuginfo files cannot be multilib. It just won't work. We can't include them.
I don't understand CANTFIX - after all I've already fixed it for my
own rawhide installation, as I described. It required an extra
Sorry, I note I didn't spell out my workaround for this problem.
It was adding this:
name=Fedora - Rawhide - Debug 64
Which appears to work. Making adding such an extra clause portably in the
fedora-release.spec file is an exercise for the reader.
And adding such a repo will lead to many file conflicts. The ppc64 debuginfo packages will conflict at a file level with the counterpart ppc32 debuginfo files. We just simply can't enable both repos at the same time, not until the tools people figure out a way to make the debuginfo multilib friendly.
Jesse, I still don't see the problem (certainly not a different one from
On my ppc64 box, both -debuginfo repos have been enabled. Since the
machine does not have .ppc AND .ppc64 of the same RPM installed, yum
does the right thing and fetches the right debuginfo from the right
repo (kernel-foo from .ppc64 and the rest from .ppc).
Can you specify a problem scenario, so I can see in actuality what
you believe can't work?
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle.
Changing version to '12'.
More information and reason for this action is here:
PPC is now a secondary arch, you'll have ot take up the issue with them. We won't be doing anything for Fedora proper.