Re: kdelibs4

[Johannes Rohr <j.rohr@gmx.de>]

On Sam, Feb 08, 2003 at 05:41:34 +0100, Mika Fischer wrote:
> * Alan Chandler <alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk> [2003-02-08 17:25]:
> > Why is the package not called "kdelibs4c102" ?
> 
> Because there never was a klelibs4 package using the g++ 2.95 ABI. 
> 
> The whole point of waiting until the transition starts before
> uploading KDE was that this way we only need one version in sid an no
> stupid c102 packages :)

Who chose this weird suffix anyway? Does it have a meaning? Will it go
away again some time after the transition?

Thanks,

Johannes