13885 2020-04-29 21:13:21 +0000 maybe we should not set default %_transaction_color to 7 2020-05-07 02:27:10 +0000 1 1 11 Runtime Package Management Issues RPM unspecified x86 Multiple RESOLVED NOTABUG Medium normal 3.3 1 changqing.li changqing.li richard.purdie --- --- No (bug/feature does not impact docs) oldest_to_newest 87107 0 changqing.li 2020-04-29 21:13:21 +0000 set %_transaction_color to 7 means 32/64bits elf all can be installed. should we just use default %_transaction_color set by rpm, which usually is set according to current arch. 87110 1 richard.purdie 2020-04-30 07:37:50 +0000 I'm not convinced this would work since there could be host/target mismatch and it may break the way we use multilibs with rpm. We'd need to understand the issues you're seeing and understand why this needs to change. 87147 2 changqing.li 2020-05-05 20:42:37 +0000 @Richard, I don't see a problem caused by transation_color. but I do see a problem caused by %_prefer_color. so I have send a patch to oe-core with titled with "lib/oe/package_manager: update default rpm config %_prefer_color" to fix problem I see caused by %_prefer_color, and open this problem just for tracking possible problem of %_transaction_color. 87160 3 changqing.li 2020-05-07 02:27:10 +0000 rpm's default transation color is 3, which means 001 (ELF32) & 010 (ELF64) but for oe-core, we have add another color 4 for mips64 n32, so the transation color should be 7. 001 (ELF32) & 010 (ELF64) & 100 (ELF32 N32 MIPS64)