On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 04:09:48PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Colin Watson ([email protected]): > > No objection on principle, but "No ... have been mounted automatically" > > doesn't read quite right to me: it sounds a bit like "we have this > > automation that has cleverly mounted no file systems, since that would > > have been hard for you to do manually". :-) > > > > How about just "No file systems have been mounted."? > > Sounds fair. I was indeed just trying to render the "spirit" of the > former "for you"...but you explained very well why making it simpler > is better (and congratulations for the nice piece of British humor > above, I always like that.... ;-))
OK, done in r57587. -- Colin Watson [[email protected]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
