From: Hendrik Schober (SpamTrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-22 03:33:15
Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> > Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > > From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> > >> "Hendrik Schober" <boost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > >>
> > >> To prepare Unix tools such as GCC, the compiler and linker must be
> > >
> > > Rather than "Unix" consider "*nix" to be more inclusive. Those
> > > using a *nix OS will understand. Those not using one won't care.
> >
> > I have no objection.
> > But I do want to know: what *nix OS is not a Unix OS?
>
> Linux is a prime example. "Unix" is a trade name that means
> something very specific. Not all Unix-like OSes are Unix.
It says "Unix tools such as GCC". Wouldn't this
apply to GCC on Linux as well?
> > >> <p> Note: the <b><code>#include</code> root</b> directory mentioned
> > >
> > > s/root/<i>root</i>
> >
> > What is your rationale for suggesting that change?
> >
> > The only possible reason I can imagine is that you're worried people
> > will think "root" is source code text. But there's already a good
> > hint: the change from code font. I'm pretty sure we don't want to get
> > into using bold-italic text without a very strong motivation.
>
> I'm pretty sure that you used italics to indicate user-specific
> information elsewhere. [...]
That would probably be me. ISTR Dave objecting to
me using italics.
> [...]
BTW, I'm still with you here, although I'm pretty
silent right now. This week is a very busy one
again. I plan to find some time on the weekend to
incorporate the changes suggested. (This also gives
you a bit more time to discuss them <g> )
Schobi
-- SpamTrap_at_[hidden] is never read I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org "Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving" Terry Pratchett