Comment 4 for bug 633691

One can already fiddle up the logic with --verify to filter the
output to meet opinions of common perceptions and luser
expectations. One can already do that in packaging, or with
disablers from the CLI, and it wouldn't be more than 2-4 lines
of code to also make --verify output configuration persistent.

Detecting a replaced and then removed file is no harder than
coupling a state transition back to "normal" when the package
of the other arch is removed, thereby inverting the transition
that occurred when one of the packages was installed.

But again, the real flaw is that having two different contents
on the same path is confusing to everyone. And the real
solution needs to be to copy the right executable back into
place from persistent storage.

Telling a luser that a file is "missing" solves no issue that isn't
better solved by putting the content in place. Which is what
I'm implementing, just not in the version of RPM that you are using.