On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 06:29 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Bob Taylor wrote: [snip] > > OK! Thanks Johnny. You just confirmed a bug here. Now I will, as time > > allows, see if I can discover why /etc/rpm/platform is incorrect. Since > > the file is in an rpm directory, shall I look at rpm? I promise *not* to > > begin another thread like this one! I'm a nice guy, really! > > > > This file (/etc/rpm/platform) is created by anaconda on install and is > NOT owned by RPM or any other package. It is USED by rpm to determine > your real arch where there are possibly multiple arches (based on your > processor type). > > I[3,4,5,6]86 packages can coexist with each other in an i386 distro > install, however you can not install an i386 package and another > i[4,5,6]86 package with the same Name and Epoch-Version-Release (EVR) at > the same time. On Red Hat based distros, /etc/rpm/platform is used to > define the main arch where more than one (based on the processor) could > be main. > > Also I[3,4,5,6]86 packages can exist in an x86_64 arch install and > I[3,4,5,6]86 packages can exist in an ia64 arch install. These (x86_64 > and ia64) are 64bit/32bit library (aka multilib) arches. They can have > lib64 and lib directories and have both an i[3,4,5,6]86 package and an > x86_64 (or ia64) package installed that have the same Name and EVR. > > Other examples of 32bit/64bit (multilib) arches are s390 and s390x, ppc > and ppc64, and finally sparc and sparc64. In each of these you can have > a 32bit (lib) and a 64bit (lib64) package of the same Name and EVR > installed at the same time. > > > So, on x86_64, you CAN have glibc.x86_64 and glibc.i686. On sparc, you > CAN have glibc.sparc and glibc.sparc64 .. but on i386 you CAN NOT have > glibc.i386 and glibc.i686. > > I can think of nothing that will (or should) change that file > (/etc/rpm/platform) except running anaconda (the installer from a CentOS > CD / DVD). > > If something does modify that file it is definitely a bug. Well, if you > are BUILDING files with rpmbuild then sometimes on some of the multilib > arches you might want to change /etc/rpm/platform to get specific > results ... but that would be a controlled process and I know of no > packages that do it automatically. > > Some of the links by Ross seem to indicate that unixODBC-devel might > impact /etc/rpm/platform ... however the version i386 version in > centos-5 does not seem to as I have installed it several times for > testing and it did not change my /etc/rpm/platform. > > I have looked at several i386 machines, and all of them have an > /etc/rpm/platform that is created on the install date, none of them have > a file that has been modified. > > If we can nail down something that changed /etc/rpm/platform it would be > good, as that file should never change. Thanks again Johnny for the info. The only non-rpm I recall installing was the cups *.tgs for my printer which I had to compile. :-( -- Bob Taylor