On Dec 13, 2007 12:30 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ed Schofield wrote:
> > What I'm wondering is why, although most packages have both i386 and
> > x86_64 versions visible to my yum client, this isn't true for the
> > openssl packages.
>
> in most cases, the backword or compat pa
Ed Schofield wrote:
> What I'm wondering is why, although most packages have both i386 and
> x86_64 versions visible to my yum client, this isn't true for the
> openssl packages.
in most cases, the backword or compat packages wont be multilib ok, and
are only published for the arch they are hosted
On Dec 13, 2007 12:00 PM, Scott Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> on 12/12/2007 4:56 PM Ed Schofield spake the following:
>
> > On Dec 13, 2007 11:23 AM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> btw, does openssl097a in centos5 not give you what you need ?
> >
> > Thanks to both you and
on 12/12/2007 4:56 PM Ed Schofield spake the following:
On Dec 13, 2007 11:23 AM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
btw, does openssl097a in centos5 not give you what you need ?
Thanks to both you and Scott for pointing this out. I had completely
missed this. This will give us exactly
on 12/12/2007 4:07 PM Ed Schofield spake the following:
[Re-sending ...]
I would like to ask why upstream and CentOS provide no compat-openssl
packages like Novell does in SUSE.
We are trying to install binaries for gLite (a huge toolkit for grid
computing linked against upstream v4 librarie
5 matches
Mail list logo
