OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Thomas Lotterer
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-doc
OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Michael Schloh
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-doc
OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Ralf S. Engelschall
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-doc
OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Ralf S. Engelschall
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-doc
OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Ralf S. Engelschall
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-doc
OpenPKG CVS Repository
http://cvs.openpkg.org/
Server: cvs.openpkg.org Name: Ralf S. Engelschall
Root: /e/openpkg/cvs Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Module: openpkg-doc
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Christoph Schug wrote:
>
> > adjusted version of foo
> > [...]
> > -If you consider some day to upgrade to C just
> > +If you consider some day to upgrade to C just
>
> What magic number is 1.5.3? If you dislike 0.8.15
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Michael Schloh von Bennewitz wrote:
> Please notice that you changed the capitalization scheme. I assume you changed
> all others in your consistency committal. Should we change all titles to use
> this scheme as well?
Err.. no, my fault. I thought this was the scheme you u
I vote for as much magic as possible ;-)
M
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Development Team, Application Services
Cable & Wireless Deutschland GmbH
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 03:32:44PM +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> What magic number is 1.5.3? If you dislike 0.8.15, perhaps you want to
> use something
Hello Ralf,
Please notice that you changed the capitalization scheme. I assume you changed
all others in your consistency committal. Should we change all titles to use
this scheme as well?
Regards,
Michael
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 03:26:13PM +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> Modified files:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Christoph Schug wrote:
> adjusted version of foo
> [...]
> -If you consider some day to upgrade to C just
> +If you consider some day to upgrade to C just
>repeat the installation in the same way, alter the symlink
> -IC to point to C instead and re-run
> +IC
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Michael Schloh wrote:
> Changed each case of 'admin' to 'system administrator' according to Ralf's
> (administrator) and Michael's (system) taste.
Neat compromise, Dude ;)
Ralf S. Engelschall
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Michael Schloh wrote:
> [...]
> When only one negation (no *) follows a single conjunction (with **) and
> precedes multiple adjective/noun tuples (***), it must logically belong to the
> first tuple. If negations and affirmations must be mixed, then the sentence
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Michael Schloh wrote:
> Changed almost all instances of 'administrator' to 'admin' because the
> magazine is called 'Sysadmin'. This is a questionable committal, because some
> might think that 'administrator' sounds more professional.
Yes, I especially because
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002, Thomas Lotterer wrote:
> a/an; ISP; mention hosting; fight dashes; proposal changing headline;
> [...]
> -instance containing everything required software component -- from
> +instance containing everything required software component - from
> [...]
I recommend to k
Thomas Lotterer wrote:
> +Thomas Lotterer is a network professional and consultant working as Unix
> +software developer at Cable & Wireless Germany. Previously working as
> +system administrator and technical trainer, he has years of experience
> +in cross-platform system integration and so
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002, Thomas Lotterer wrote:
> [...]
>old in old on new in new on
>package filesystem package filesystem approach
> == ==
>===
> -XX XX keep old con
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002, Christoph Schug wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > > [...]
> > > All modern Unix platforms support RAM based filesystems. For performance
> > > +
> > > +FIXME: this is not true for Linux 2.2 kernels
> > > +
> > > [...]
> > > # Linux (Kernel
On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > All modern Unix platforms support RAM based filesystems. For performance
> > +
> > +FIXME: this is not true for Linux 2.2 kernels
> > +
> > [...]
> > # Linux (Kernel 2.4.x), /etc/f
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> [...]
> All modern Unix platforms support RAM based filesystems. For performance
> +
> +FIXME: this is not true for Linux 2.2 kernels
> +
> [...]
> # Linux (Kernel 2.4.x), /etc/fstab:
> tmpfs /tmp tmpfs size=64m,noatime 0 0
> [...]
Sure,
20 matches
Mail list logo
