dv> I really don't see any good reason why common users would want a dv> different directory for each patch level. For different releases, maybe. But dv> for patch levels... The problem is that there's no universal definition among software packages of what distinguishes a patch from a beta release from an alpha release from a major from a minor version. In the past, I've almost always regretted not reflecting the full version granularity in pathnames. I can't see any harm in it. -- Cheers =8-} Chipsy Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla