On Mon, January 31, 2005 8:35 am, Jeff Spaleta said: > 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. > Jeff, You keep missing the point. Just because you don't think it's a corner case, while a fascinating bit of information doesn't mean it's important factor for anyone. You continue to miss that people have already offered workable solutions. Anyway, you've failed to show it has ever been an important factor in the past or would even be one in the future. Nothing has changed. Sean
