[pacman-dev] libalpm or libpacman?

[VMiklos]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 09:06:15PM +0100, Mark Rosenstand <mark at archlinux.org> wrote:
> libpacman doesn't sound too good, but any less flavored name should do
> the trick. I guess it all boils down to whether pacman is "a package
> manager" or "the Arch Linux package manager" - so, what is it? :-)

just look at the code, in pacman, there are pacman_sync, pacman_add,
etc. in libalpm, there are alpm_addtarget, alpm_relase, etc. now if
libalpm would be renamed to libpacman, then probably we would rename
alpm_addtarget to pacman_addtarget, and so, which would mess up the
current structure

udv / greetings,
VMiklos

-- 
Developer of Frugalware Linux, to make things frugal - http://frugalware.org