From owner-freebsd-doc Sun Jun 2 9:22:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6087A37B40B for ; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 09:22:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bmah.dyndns.org ([12.233.149.189]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020602162204.CCPJ11183.sccrmhc02.attbi.com@bmah.dyndns.org>; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 16:22:04 +0000 Received: from intruder.bmah.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by bmah.dyndns.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g52GM3fs037766; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 09:22:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bmah@intruder.bmah.org) Received: (from bmah@localhost) by intruder.bmah.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g52GLxXP037765; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 09:21:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200206021621.g52GLxXP037765@intruder.bmah.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5+ 20020506 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Giorgos Keramidas Cc: Ross Lippert , ac14806t@st.nagaoka-ct.ac.jp, doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Question] A `-h' flag for ls(1) in relnotes (RELENG_4) In-reply-to: <20020601184640.GB414@hades.hell.gr> References: <20020601162910.GB566@hades.hell.gr> <200206011636.JAA22996@eskimo.com> <20020601184640.GB414@hades.hell.gr> Comments: In-reply-to Giorgos Keramidas message dated "Sat, 01 Jun 2002 21:46:41 +0300." From: "Bruce A. Mah" Reply-To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG X-Face: g~c`.{#4q0"(V*b#g[i~rXgm*w;:nMfz%_RZLma)UgGN&=j`5vXoU^@n5v4:OO)c["!w)nD/!!~e4Sj7LiT'6*wZ83454H""lb{CC%T37O!!'S$S&D}sem7I[A 2V%N&+ X-Image-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Images/bmah-cisco-small.gif X-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2002 09:21:59 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org If memory serves me right, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2002-06-01 09:36 -0700, Ross Lippert wrote: > > >My intuition says that there are two ways to write this: > > > three or less > > > less than four > > Hey if someone can show me documentation that supports this usage, > > then I'll stop worrying about it, but for until that happens, I'll > > think that fewer is what you should apply to whole numbers and > > less only applies to continuous. > > > > three or fewer > > > > fewer than four > > I'll have to dig some English grammar books that have been rusting in > bookshelves for ages. See, this is why I love this list... it makes > things like these books, that keep aging slowly in my house, to be > useful again! > > Seriously now, I don't know. I'll have to check out a grammar/syntax > book to make sure what the 'yours truly & pedantically anal-retentive' > way of writing this is ;) I'm going with "fewer than four". Noting that we're under a release deadline, I am at the moment less concerned than getting the grammar exactly right than I am about getting the factual information "as close to correct as possible". :-) Thanks, all! Bruce. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message