On Mar 30, 2005 11:58 AM, James Wilkinson <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Doug Coats wrote: > > I just purchased a new computer with the AMD 64bit processor. I installed > > FC3 on it yesterday using the 64bit version. When I went to use up2date I > > noticed both 32bit and 64bit files for upgrades. Many of the 64bit files > > would not install, complaining about conflicts with the 32bit versions that > > were already installed. The 32bit versions would not install either. Now > > that is when I select only all 32bit or all 64bit files. > > > > What am I supposed to do. Do I need to have both of them installed? > Yes. > > > Is > > this simply a result of not having some of these programs in 64bit at the > > time of the release so that they were installed as 32bit versions and now > > they are available as 64bit? > > Yes, pretty much. Some programs won't compile in 64 bit mode > (OpenOffice...) Others (many closed-source programs) aren't available in > 64 bit versions. > > Unfortunately, a 32 bit program needs a 32 bit library. So since > OpenOffice requires evolution-data-server, that has to be present in a > 32 bit version and a 64 bit version (assuming 64 bit programs need > evolution-data-server...) > > Some files are stored in common, belonging to part of both the 32 bit > RPM and the 64 bit RPM. So it's a very good idea to make sure that these > install in parallel. > > If you can't update all of the files, try updating (say) all the x.org > files -- for both x86-64 and i386 -- at the same time. Split up the list > of files into manageable chunks. When you get to problematic files, try > leaving them out. Then report back... > > > Would apt or yum treat this differently? > > Yes. Apt would metaphorically fall over and kick its legs in the air. > (It doesn't like the dual-arch set-up Fedora uses). > > Yum would probably give you the same problems. > > Note that if you un-install the 32-bit version but leave the 64-bit > version, RPM will get rid of the files shared between both RPMs. To my > mind, this is less than ideal... > > James. > > -- > E-mail address: james | "During the shutdown period I received not one > @westexe.demon.co.uk | single support call, confirming my theory that my > | network is indeed perfect, and that all faults are > | user-inflicted." > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > I've been experiencing the same problem as well. I've tried several things and nothing has worked. I've even gone to the update site and tried doing it from there but I get the same errors, which is "conflict with xxxx file" -- Linux user since '98.
