>>>>> "VS" == Ville Skytt <Ville> writes: VS> There's also a precedent of naming stuff like this as compat-foo, VS> and I think it's generally preferred over version based suffixing VS> nowadays, at least when there's no intention to keep permanently VS> shipping many versions of something. Naming here seems to be ill-defined; we have both compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-55.fc5.i386 (compat-name-ver-ver-release} and compat-db-4.2.52-4.i386 (compat-name-ver-release). I guess compat-erlang-R10B-1.fc5.i386 makes the most sense. VS> Yet another case to the pile of recent incompatible upgrades :( Yes, this is OK in rawhide but scary in the release branches. - J< -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
