--Signature=_Mon__12_Apr_2004_02_10_44_+0200_wKWyvFdhdVOa+48i
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 02:05:51 +0200 (CEST)
"Hubert Feyrer" <hubert@feyrer.de> wrote:

> I hope the pkg names don't clash either?

I was thinking that, having two ish packages is not wrong, but you'll have to
deinstall one if you want to build the other one... so it's better to avoid
duplicate names.

> BTW, wouldn't icmpshell or so be more obvious?

Agreed, icmpshell looks better, but ishell looks fine to me too... 

-- 
	Juan RP <juan@xtraeme.unixbsd.org>

--Signature=_Mon__12_Apr_2004_02_10_44_+0200_wKWyvFdhdVOa+48i
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFAed6EypkLYVDran0RAh1AAJ91Yc0niZEIgGxCK1AtiVjIX+KSewCgh7sj
qNq8pRmDP68EsEZKfNoxl/E=
=ywiA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature=_Mon__12_Apr_2004_02_10_44_+0200_wKWyvFdhdVOa+48i--