[2010-04-12 13:30] Szabolcs Nagy <nszabo...@gmail.com> > On 4/12/10, Uriel <lost.gob...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What is your question? > > he just pointed out that 'sed 11q' incorrectly listed as an alternative > to 'head' on cat-v (the correct alternative would be 'sed 10q')
Correct. Thanks to all who replied. Now I understand, why one might want to use 11q instead of 10q. > but it's a minor detail.. Nonetheless I think it should be changed to 10q on the harmful website, because that's the correct replacement. But, I agree that it is only a detail, actually. meillo
