On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:18:25 -0500 (EST), Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Your idea would work as would a couple other options. It just seems > like the wrong time to worry about such a minor corner case that won't > really change the end-user experience. If jeff or someone else wants to > worry about it now, there are ways they can proceed without needing to > interject the demand that it be solved by anyone else working on other > improvements to rpm. Yuo keep missing my point. I think some packagers have been worrying about this all along and is one of the reason why soname in packagename hasnt been the norm for Red Hat ever. Whether or not you think its a corner case.. while a fascinating bit of information for me to know... doesn't change whether or not this issue i bring has been an important factor in the past for packagers who are not using the soname-in-packagename model. And if it has been an important factor in the past... i'd like to know what has changed. -jef
