LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Fedora
User Name
Password
Fedora This forum is for the discussion of the Fedora Project.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 01-11-2007, 03:59 AM   #1
tcrew
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Posts: 35

Rep: Reputation: 15
Fedora 6 x86 64 Update are downloading 32bit files..?


Ok i installed Fedora 6 x6 64BiT on VMware, as i'm testing a few different version of linux to see what i like before i install properly.

Anyway when using add/remove programs some of the updates it downloads are i386 (32BiT) versions instead of the x86 (64BiT) versions. Then when installing the update i get errors, some of them are conflicts.

Can anyone help me.

Also the Auto Update that runs on startup says there are 165 updates, but always gets an error when installing them.

Last edited by tcrew; 01-11-2007 at 04:00 AM.
 
Old 01-11-2007, 04:21 AM   #2
tcrew
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Posts: 35

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Another thing i've noticed is that after doing the dependancies it always says "Adding these packages requires addtional updates for proper operation" Why's that..?
 
Old 01-11-2007, 07:21 AM   #3
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 61
Hey tcrew, we meet again.

I'm going to voice my opinion which is based on common sense and not knowledge.
There is a lot of software out there for unix/linux systems, not all of them have been ported to 64bit, a lot of old classics are probably no longer maintained but a lot of people are hooked on their favorite old apps.
Hypotheticaly speaking, let's say you are not a newbie and you knew that your favorite old app would not work on a 64 bit system. Would you migrate to 64 bit or stay in the past? 64 bit as you may have heard is the future system but as of today they are not perfect, same with 32 bit systems, 32 bit systems may be a little more stable which stands to reason as there are more "man hours" in it's development as a whole. But because both 32 & 64 bit systems were desinged and put together by "HUMANS", they will "NEVER" be perfect just like the humans.

Now I'm not a religious man but they say "God made man in an image of himself". Trust me when I say that "the nut does'nt fall far from the tree", the imperfection thing trickles all the way down.

As for the update errors:
Maybe you'll want to read my opinion in this post:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=518128
 
Old 01-11-2007, 11:07 AM   #4
tcrew
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Posts: 35

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Hi junior again thanks for the reply... I know that when i install XP 64 there's not a great amount of support for it, yes software will run but most of it is 32 bit stuff anyway... Go Figure...?
 
Old 01-17-2007, 06:01 AM   #5
alonewolf
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
i was solving this problem with yumex in FC 5.(Generally the crashes occure when one package is a new version and the other is an old version. Both must be same version.) First find the packages which are crashing and remove them then install the package (both 32 bit and 64 bit) u can use yum for it. i hope it helps you.

Last edited by alonewolf; 01-17-2007 at 06:09 AM.
 
Old 01-17-2007, 10:27 PM   #6
Junior Hacker
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: North America
Distribution: Debian testing Mandriva Ubuntu
Posts: 2,687

Rep: Reputation: 61
BTW

As for your question regarding dependencies.
I believe Windows got where they are through aggressive marketing strategy and tactic. I also feel that third party software ported for Windows follows the same strategy. As a repairman I think the worst thing you can do to your Windows system is to carelessly click yes during hardware or software installation off a CD. For example, Windows XP has a tonne (figuratively speaking) of native drivers included with the operating system to run hardware that conforms to a set standard. Meaning, you don't have to put the CD that came with your HP Scanjet scanner to use it, you just have to plug it in and Windows XP will tell you it found new hardware, than it will tell you it is looking for drivers, eventually telling you your new hardware is installed and ready to use. Not all hardware especially new designs will automatically be supported without the CD.
What is on that CD?, for all intensive purposes, most of the time all you need off that CD is the driver to run you new webcam (example) but going back to this aggressive marketing thing, if you just keep clicking yes after putting the CD in, you will end up installing all sorts of semi/non related third party software not really needed, but it's on the CD to help promote it (marketing strategy). Overloading your Windows system with useless software and not configuring it properly usually ends up slowing down it's performance.
On my Windows XP I have Adobe Acrobat Reader 7, all of a sudden I decide I want to work on photos using an old photo suite called Adobe Photoshop 4 (example), and it's documentation is in .pdf format (Adobe Reader), in it's day the version of the Acrobat Reader may have been #4 and it's on the CD also, if I needlessly click yes, I end up with two versions of the reader installed on my system, #4 & #7, both will display the documentation, I have seen instances where a customer's computer had three versions of that one software suite installed when all that is required/recommended is the latest version.

You may have noticed what I noticed, a comparable software suite in Linux (Photo shop), appears to be smaller than what gets pumped into your Windows system off the CD when you do not choose "Custom installation" and just click yes, yes, yes.
If a .pdf reader is required to display .pdf documents in a Linux ported software suite and you do not have it installed, it becomes a "dependency", if you do have it install, that dependency is not required to be added.

I "feel", Linux is better at managing software required to give you what you are after, and not installing multiple instances/versions of the same thing.

Last edited by Junior Hacker; 01-17-2007 at 11:02 PM.
 
Old 01-18-2007, 05:14 AM   #7
alonewolf
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
But there is no 64 bit versions of some packages and they are asking some packages 32 bit version.(for ex: open office) i haven't tried it for FC 6 but in FC 5 the situation was this.i agree with you it has many benefits.
i have installed FC 6 on my pc but i haven't internet connection at my home but i will have and try it.
i hope it don't need 32 bit packages but i don't think so.

thank you for concern......

Last edited by alonewolf; 01-18-2007 at 05:19 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
installing 32bit firefox on 64bit fedora 4 status0 Fedora - Installation 13 08-29-2006 02:42 PM
Compiling MPlayer 32bit on Fedora 4 64bit mwales Linux - Software 2 08-28-2006 06:59 AM
Fedora 32bit chroot Aurer Linux - Software 0 03-28-2006 08:15 PM
Fedora Core 1...can I update to core 2 w/out downloading all discs again? arctic123 Red Hat 3 09-05-2004 05:47 AM
Downloading Redhat 8 update RPMs nathanv117 Linux - Newbie 3 01-02-2003 12:00 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Fedora

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration