Re: binutils-2.20.1a replaced by 2.20.1 and so 2.21.1a?

[Abdoulaye Walsimou GAYE <awg at embtoolkit dot org>]

On 08/30/2011 05:36 PM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Steffen Dettmer wrote:
>
> > > This was a license issue raised by the FSF: some files were
> > > derived from cgen files, but these cgen files weren't included
> > > in the tarballs.  We were asked by the FSF to repackage all the
> > > incomplete tarballs.
> > Thank you for your quick reply.
> >
> > The issue itself is interesting. Sounds like much effort and may
> > even require undesired things like modifying release tags...
> > I though it would be sufficient to publish GPLed files, not that a
> > special form could be required (and I had assumed it had been
> > sufficient to put them on some public server or even just to some
> > CVS repository reabable by the public).
> Yes, the workload is not minimal, but this was the FSF decision.
>
> Tristan.

This kind of URL change is a serial killer for automatic build system/script already shipped.
Is it possible to have simlinks like 'oldername'->'newname'
(as for example binutils-2.21.1a.tar.bz2 tarball will actually contain binutils-2.21.1)?

Thanks,
AWG