Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch
From: Ceri Davies (ceri_at_submonkey.net)
Date: 04/17/04
- Previous message: Brian F. Feldman: "Re: kqueue giant-locking (&kq_Giant, locking)"
- In reply to: Bruce Evans: "Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch"
- Next in thread: John Baldwin: "Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch"
- Reply: John Baldwin: "Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 14:16:17 +0100 To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 10:19:58AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
>
> > the purpose of the original thread was to convert "all" variables to one
> > form or another, not just some of them for some or other reason.
> > in one word... be consistant, it's help.
> > it's not my fault if only some "no conforming" variables regarding all
> > others are used in so many makefiles.
>
> For a more modest task, try fixing the English spelling of "nothing"
> to "no thing" and "consistent" to "consistant".
There's noway that could be considered the same thing.
(Disclaimer: I really don't care which way this falls out).
Ceri
--
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Brian F. Feldman: "Re: kqueue giant-locking (&kq_Giant, locking)"
- In reply to: Bruce Evans: "Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch"
- Next in thread: John Baldwin: "Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch"
- Reply: John Baldwin: "Re: bin/41071: make NO to NO_ transition patch"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
