On 12/20/2010 11:32 AM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 10:20:49 -0700
Orion Poplawski<orion(a)cora.nwra.com> wrote:
> On 12/13/2010 11:04 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> On 12/13/2010 09:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 08:47:54 -0700
>>> Orion Poplawski<orion(a)cora.nwra.com> wrote:
>>>> Ah, I didn't catch the multilib aspect (32-bit missing on x86_64).
>>>> So, this needs to be fixed in the EPEL multilib compose?
>>> It can't be. It's the way it is in the rhel repos. We could copy
>>> and re-create the rhel repos, but thats not something I think we
>>> want to do.
>>>
>>> kevin
>> What I meant was - could we exclude items that require
>> gcc-gfortran(x86-32) from the EPEL x86_64 repos?
>>
> Does anyone know how I/we can fix this?
Drop the Requires: gcc-gfortran%{_isa} and it will work.
Maybe someone should mention this in the guidelines; this won't work on
any Fedora or RHEL until x86_64 gfortran is made to provide
gcc-gfortran(x86-32)... [Although I don't know if 64-bit gfortran ran
with -m32 produces the same modules as 32-bit gfortran]
This works perfectly fine
on Fedora because gcc-gfortran.i686 is present
in the x86_64 repo.
I guess dropping the %{_isa} would prevent the broken dep at the expense
of perhaps being useless.