Hi, On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:37:28PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > That is how the new scheme was designed. If libelf0-devel and > > libelf1-devel conflict then the name libelf-devel should have been kept. > > (Of course there are some internal problems with that, in case both > > libelf versions are in a single build repository. This may be the > > reason of the differing names.) > > > > Btw, I only see libelf0 in 10.3. > > But you can't know in advance if some other version will conflict > or not, can you? So shouldn't it be libelf-devel until you know > that different versions do not conflict? That was the intention, yes. Ciao, Michael. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
