Re: PAM still a goal for slink?

[Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>]

> > RedHat can bump theirs painlessly to achieve compatibility.
> 
> If we bump a pre-1.0 version to a soname of libpam.so.1, Red Hat might
> not be entirely happy with not having a soname which matches the
> program version when PAM 1.0 comes out.

Ah, hadn't though of that.

> > The worst thing that could result from RH doing this being that you
> > might have the same library with 2 sonames under RH, and thus waste a little
> > disk and memory until the transition is complete.
> 
> So what I see is: bump the soname and keep the libraries in /usr.
> 
> Bump it to 1 or to 0.65?  (I like 0.65 or 0a so that we can
> synchronize when version 1.0 comes out.

If 0.65 works, then that sounds best to me.

Cheers, Phil.