From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262048AbTJAJI0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 05:08:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262052AbTJAJI0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 05:08:26 -0400 Received: from wohnheim.fh-wedel.de ([213.39.233.138]:21728 "EHLO wohnheim.fh-wedel.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262048AbTJAJIX (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 05:08:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:08:17 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel To: Bill Davidsen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.0-test6 Message-ID: <20031001090817.GA31698@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <20030930104201.GA11752@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 30 September 2003 11:17:51 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, [iso-8859-1] J?rn Engel wrote: > > > > How is this better than adding "-H", as Jamie suggested? > > I didn't see that in Linus' post, and still don't. I suspect you're > thinking of some post which came later. Linus asked for ideas, I supplied > one, sorry it offends you. Ok, my bad. I wasn't offended, just curious, which one of the suggestions would be the best. Jamie's idea of using -H looks better to me than yours, but maybe I have missed something, so I asked. For some reason, I often miss the tone. Any emotional stuff in my posts is unintended, useless and should be removed before sending. Sorry! Jörn PS: So, does your idea have advantages over Jamie's that I missed? -- "Translations are and will always be problematic. They inflict violence upon two languages." (translation from German)