[lug] library naming conventions, sym links

[D. Stimits]

I've always thought that libraries (dynamic) would be named in the 
format of:
libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
...then a sym link created for
libSomeLib.so.0.0 -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
libSomeLib.so.0 -> libSomeLib.0.0
libSomeLib.so -> libSomeLib.0

However, it seems that rpm is telling me this is wrong. Rpm seems to 
want to do this, where libSomeLib.so.0.0.0 is the hard link:
libSomeLib.so -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
libSomeLib.so.0 -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0
libSomeLib.so.0.0 -> libSomeLib.so.0.0.0

Is this a correct standard, with the top scenario being wrong? It seems 
like rpm is breaking things (or at least looking for a way to cause 
version breakage) by using the latter version of sym link.

D. Stimits, stimits AT comcast DOT net