On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 19:34 -0400, William Case wrote: > Hi Craig; > > > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 15:28 -0700, Craig White wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 17:59 -0400, William Case wrote: > > > Thanks Craig; > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 14:32 -0700, Craig White wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 17:25 -0400, William Case wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 16:55 -0400, William Case wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > ---- > > > > you must not be checking too hard because > > > > http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/releases/9/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/ > > > > > > > > shows both an i386 and an x86_64 version > > > > > > Never been there before. Always relied on yum or yumex; neither showed > > > the 32 bit libflashsupport. Went to the everything site, clicked on the > > > rpm. It downloaded and installed itself -- now I have sound. > > ---- > > I don't use yumex, never have. > > > > yum would have installed both i386 & x86_64 versions unless you have > > some exclusion in yum.conf - I would look at yumex with suspicion if > > that is the tool you used. > > > > hmmmm -- curiouser and curiouser; in first attempt at installing > libflashsupport I used yum not yumex. > > sudo yum install libflashsupport and got only the x86_64 version. > > After your next post, I su - to root and > > yum install libflashsupport -- with and without various versions of a 32 > and a i386 suffix and got nothing. "yum install libflashsupport.i386" worked for me. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
