On Sat, 25 May 2002, Michael Meskes wrote:
> No, this is simply not true. The version number is what the upstream
> gives its release. No more no less. What RH does is becoming as subtly
> incompatible a possible. If that's the goal, it doesn't look like free
> software for me. Sure all changes are published, but why forcing this
> kind of difference between linux distributions? Why not calling it 2.2.6
> or something if there has to be some changes that are not compatible?
Or rlibc? :)