Greg,

I am not subscribed to tech-pkg@ but I will cc: and cross my fingers.

Thanks for the remarks. Obviously it's more complicated than I thoguht,
and two workarounds are already apparent. I withdraw the patch.

BTW, I don't think it's true that a package name ending in -1.6U.0
or -1.6U is invalid. Package names which pass through that code path
commonly contain version numbers, e.g., *-1.4.2.tgz. The @name is written
with the version number. Do tell if I misunderstand, since it's probably
important to System Packages.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung@ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933