Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So I still think the name "lock" is fine.
Here's a little bit more evidence. I just checked Debian stable, and it has an /usr/include/lock.h, installed by an AFS development package. See: http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_contents.pl?searchmode=filelist&word=arla-dev&version=stable&arch=i386 So an AFS-aware program might have trouble using this new module. Also, distcc has a "lock.h". See <http://distcc.samba.org/>. As does qmail <http://www.qmail.org/>. And FSP <http://fsp.sourceforge.net/>. Someone who wanted to use this module in a modification of these programs might have a problem too. No doubt other programs are affected; I simply did a Google search and looked at the first two or three pages of results. None of these objections are fatal, but please take these considerations into account with the package's naming conventions. _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
