On Fri, 12 May 2017 18:15:05 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >> Causes no end of confusion when the firewall admin replies to a
> >> ticket saying he'll do it and revert.
> >
> > I'd be complaining about someone like that the whole time.
> > "Why the *beep* will you revert all changes before we c
On May 12, 2017 6:15:05 PM GMT+02:00, Alan McKinnon
wrote:
>On 12/05/2017 09:37, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> On May 11, 2017 11:20:49 AM GMT+02:00, Alan McKinnon
> wrote:
>>> On 11/05/2017 02:09, Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Wednesday 10 May 2017 23:33:37 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> I you read -d
On 12/05/2017 09:37, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On May 11, 2017 11:20:49 AM GMT+02:00, Alan McKinnon
> wrote:
>> On 11/05/2017 02:09, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 10 May 2017 23:33:37 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>>
I you read -dev, you could have replied to the original with a
>> correct
On May 11, 2017 11:20:49 AM GMT+02:00, Alan McKinnon
wrote:
>On 11/05/2017 02:09, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>> On Wednesday 10 May 2017 23:33:37 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>> I you read -dev, you could have replied to the original with a
>correct
>>> fix :-)
>>
>> No good. I can't read C. I gave up i
On 11/05/2017 02:09, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 May 2017 23:33:37 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> I you read -dev, you could have replied to the original with a correct
>> fix :-)
>
> No good. I can't read C. I gave up in the '80s and reverted to assembler.
>
>> The author isn't English m
On Wednesday 10 May 2017 23:33:37 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> I you read -dev, you could have replied to the original with a correct
> fix :-)
No good. I can't read C. I gave up in the '80s and reverted to assembler.
> The author isn't English mother-tongue btw [1]
Maybe not, but he's only following
On Wednesday 10 May 2017 10:57:30 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2017 10:09:26 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > Be advised that switching from an older version to GCC 6 will ...
> >
> > Those first three words are redundant; they add nothing.
>
> Except for those of us that are paid by t
On 10/05/2017 11:09, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> "Can not" should be "cannot" (different meaning).
>
> I did say this is all off-topic. Apologies to anyone who feels aggrieved. I
> could have suggested several other improvements as well, so I could say I've
> let you off lightly. ;-)
I you read -d
On Wednesday 10 May 2017 10:11:36 Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:09:26AM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote
>
> > On Tuesday 09 May 2017 14:29:16 Walter Dnes wrote:
> > > It's a feature, not a bug. There's a news item being worked on in
> > > the Gentoo dev list. I'd normally just link
On Wed, 10 May 2017 13:50:40 +0100, David W Noon wrote:
> > Except for those of us that are paid by the word ;-)
>
> ... those of us *who* are paid by the word. ... :-)
who/that/what/is it's all the same price ;-)
--
Neil Bothwick
Fill what's empty, empty what's full, scratch where it itch
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:09:26AM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote
> On Tuesday 09 May 2017 14:29:16 Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> > It's a feature, not a bug. There's a news item being worked on in
> > the Gentoo dev list. I'd normally just link to a mail archive, but it's
> > too new to have been archive
On Wed, 10 May 2017 13:50:40 +0100
David W Noon wrote:
> those of us *who* are paid by the word.
*whomst
pgpDeD8naDnBF.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wed, 10 May 2017 10:57:30 +0100, Neil Bothwick (n...@digimed.co.uk)
wrote about "Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Horrible English" (in
<20170510105615.7340c...@digimed.co.uk>):
[snip]
Except for those of us that are paid by the word ;-)
... those of us *who* are
On Wed, 10 May 2017 10:09:26 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Be advised that switching from an older version to GCC 6 will ...
>
> Those first three words are redundant; they add nothing.
Except for those of us that are paid by the word ;-)
I learned grammar by reading the collected plays of
On Tuesday 09 May 2017 14:29:16 Walter Dnes wrote:
> It's a feature, not a bug. There's a news item being worked on in
> the Gentoo dev list. I'd normally just link to a mail archive, but it's
> too new to have been archived yet. Here's a copy of the proposed news
> item.
(Quoting order change
15 matches
Mail list logo