On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 19:15 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > >On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 14:15 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > > > > > > >>RedHat Linux distributions have always been designed to be upgradeable; > >>right from the outset the RPM package manager had as one of its design > >>goals the ability to easily upgrade everything. The "official" way of > >>upgrading though is to use the anaconda installer on the CDs/DVD to do > >>the upgrade. This is the way least likely to result in problems. > >>Upgrading via yum/apt may also work, yum will not work without major effort. > >> but YMMV; anaconda is coded with > >>knowledge of things that need to be done (e.g. on FC4 it will remove the > >>i386 version of perl on x86_64 installs), information that isn't > >>available to yum or apt. > >> > >> > >Well, that's what I call broked design. > > > >Ralf > > > > > I would be very interested in your solution to fix this particular issue > any other way It's beyond my knowledge on this particular issue (IIRC, FC3 shipped i386 perl packages, while FC4 is going to be shipped with x86_64 packages). Esp. I don't know x86_64's rpm/yum/apt are handling mixed architecture installations. Anyway, for rpm, apt, yum and similar tools to work correctly, all such kind of information must be encoded into rpms. Therefore using anaconda to achieve an architecture switch for certain packages is a hack and violates rpm, yum, apt etc. working principles. Ralf
