X86_64 Upgrade 10.3->11.0 problem

I’ve been running 10.3 x86_64 on a AMD TurionX2 laptop. Downloaded the 11.0 x86_64 DVD and performed an ‘upgrade’ last night. The upgrade completed successfully and the computer seems fine, i.e. it boots and works nearly as expected.

However if I try to refresh several manually installed x86_64 packages, rpm says “package X is intended for a x86_64 architecture”.

If I run “uname” the system reports:
uname -m → i686
uname -p → athlon
uname -i → i386

No where does uname indicate ‘x86_64’! My other machines (Intel-based) running x86_64 10.3 do show ‘x86_64’ for ‘uname -mpi’.

If I open YaST, it shows that x86_64 packages are installed, which seems correct.

I’ve verified that I have installed the correct 11.0 x86_64 DVD by checking the MD5 checksum.

Why does my system think it’s not x86_64, yet is running x86_64 OpenSUSE 11.0?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

That’s the weirdest thing I’ve heard all day… almost. Do any of the
following show 64-bit in their output?

file which bash
file which top
file which ps

Also, can you list the output of your /boot directory (ls -al /boot)
and perhaps post the output from:

rpm -qa | grep -i kernel

Good luck.

linux-spack wrote:
> I’ve been running 10.3 x86_64 on a AMD TurionX2 laptop. Downloaded the
> 11.0 x86_64 DVD and performed an ‘upgrade’ last night. The upgrade
> completed successfully and the computer seems fine, i.e. it boots and
> works nearly as expected.
>
> However if I try to refresh several manually installed x86_64 packages,
> rpm says “package X is intended for a x86_64 architecture”.
>
> If I run “uname” the system reports:
> uname -m → i686
> uname -p → athlon
> uname -i → i386
>
> No where does uname indicate ‘x86_64’! My other machines (Intel-based)
> running x86_64 10.3 do show ‘x86_64’ for ‘uname -mpi’.
>
> If I open YaST, it shows that x86_64 packages are installed, which
> seems correct.
>
> I’ve verified that I have installed the correct 11.0 x86_64 DVD by
> checking the MD5 checksum.
>
> Why does my system think it’s not x86_64, yet is running x86_64
> OpenSUSE 11.0?
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJHN6U3s42bA80+9kRAsXUAJ4nhWRbpX/jvOjmZRLMeFo9YxqPtQCeL6zt
Z4EhGLFqgobJS3hVEFeDHzE=
=qpIl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Thanks for your help. I agree it’s the strangest thing I’ve seen too. Here is the output for those commands.

for the "file which ...":
/bin/bash: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.4, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped

for “rpm -qa | grep -i kernel”:
linux-kernel-headers-2.6.25-8.1
kernel-default-2.6.25.18-0.2
kernel-source-2.6.25.18-0.2

for “ls -al /boot”:
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 1024 2008-11-13 21:28 .
drwxr-xr-x 22 root root 4096 2008-11-14 15:35 …
-rw------- 1 root root 512 2008-05-30 06:18 backup_mbr
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 1 2008-11-13 03:54 boot → .
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 83039 2008-10-22 16:12 config-2.6.25.18-0.2-default
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 1024 2008-11-14 15:35 grub
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 2008-11-13 21:28 initrd → initrd-2.6.25.18-0.2-default
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 6050175 2008-11-13 21:28 initrd-2.6.25.18-0.2-default
drwx------ 2 root root 12288 2008-05-30 05:52 lost+found
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 427520 2008-11-13 04:28 message
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 389120 2008-11-10 22:11 message.old
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 198181 2008-10-22 16:12 symsets-2.6.25.18-0.2-default.tar.gz
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 441020 2008-10-22 16:13 symtypes-2.6.25.18-0.2-default.gz
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 126807 2008-10-22 16:12 symvers-2.6.25.18-0.2-default.gz
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 1175627 2008-10-22 16:04 System.map-2.6.25.18-0.2-default
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 2503737 2008-10-22 16:11 vmlinux-2.6.25.18-0.2-default.gz
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 29 2008-11-13 21:27 vmlinuz → vmlinuz-2.6.25.18-0.2-default
-rw-r–r-- 1 root root 2108824 2008-10-22 16:04 vmlinuz-2.6.25.18-0.2-default

Solved!

I ssh’d into the machine and did ‘uname -mpi’. To my surprise it listed ‘x86_64 x86_64 x86_64’, exactly what I would expect.

On the local machine, I see that the Konsole terminal I was using (it’s launched from the Taskbar) says ‘linux32’, the 32-bit version. Using this terminal shows the wrong uname information!

When I launched the 64-bit Konsole, it properly reports the uname information.

For whatever reasons I’ve been using the 32-bit version with 10.3 and it never had the problem with not recognizing x86_64, so this must be something that changed with 11.0.

I hope this helps someone else.