On 11/30/2012 09:13 AM, Mike Burger wrote: >> From: Tony Molloy <tony.molloy at ul.ie> >> >>> Is this a case a repo pollution, it can't be necessary to have i386 >>> packages in the x86_64 updates. Just checking before I delete these >>> packages. >> You need them to run i386 apps on a x86_64. >> >> JD > True, but i386/i686 packages are usually still only located in the 32bit > repo directories...they're not usually intermingled in the actual download > directories, last I checked. > It has been being done this way since x86_64 was first released by Red Hat ... See Fedora Core 1's x86_64 updates directory and search for i386. http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/core/updates/1/x86_64/ They still do it that way in their latest release: http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/17/x86_64/ We have been doing it that way since our first release as well: http://vault.centos.org/3.1/updates/x86_64/RPMS/ It is just how multilib is done in Red Hat type distributions. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 262 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20121130/4c20dd52/attachment-0005.sig>