Axel Thimm wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:45AM +0200, Javier Palacios wrote:
>> Ok, so the reason we have consolidated on x86 and x86_64 (not i386 or
>> i686) is to ensure that we don't break things unexpectedly with respect
>> to yum. There i386 is incorrect there as it will not pull in i686
>> kernel packages, so there we need i686, which is why the internal
>> represenation is stored as x86. And since we sometimes compare the
>> arches of distros with the arches of repo objects they should be stored
>> the same way.
>>
> Should I understand that x86 is the canonical name for i386?
It's the name we are going to use to describe 32 bit systems to avoid
the baggage of debating whether "i386" referers
to i386 compatible instructions or can include i686, which is pretty
much omnipresent now.
> The import code
> did transform x86 into i386, so I guessed the latter is the good one. But your
> paragraph points that pxegen does the right transformation and that the real bug
> was in action_import. If that is the case, let me correct the patch before even
> thinking of apply them, as it comes from a misunderstanding.
>
In Fedora/RHEL world i386 means more or less ia32. In kernel/rpm
speech i686 is a subarchitecture of i386.
yum/anaconda on i386 do query the system to decide on whether to
pull in i586 vs i686 vs athlon packages for kernels/glibc (well it
did, most of the athlon stuff has been consolidated into i686 by now,
but eleder RHEL like RHEL3 still have this distinction).
Yum's reposync seemed to want i686 passed in for the arch, if not
running on that arch, to grab the kernel packages, FWIW.
It did not like "i386" in that case.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cobbler mailing list
cobbler(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler