Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 12:57:45 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/rescue/rescue Makefile Message-ID: <20030906055745.GB72373@regency.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <xzpekyvq7xf.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <42548.1062488547@critter.freebsd.dk> <20030902004917.S6074@znfgre.qbhto.arg> <3F58B8B7.30107@tcoip.com.br> <xzpekyvq7xf.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@tcoip.com.br> writes: > > I recall bde being in favour of respecting English rules, meaning > > NOOPTIONS. :-) > > > > So this consensus isn't at all all that consensual. > > ISTR bde was pretty much alone on his side of the fence. > > A prime example of why NOFOO is a bad idea, BTW, is the (now obsolete) > NODESCRYPTLINKS option. I keep reading that first part as "nodes" > instead of "no DES", and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I second this. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030906055745.GB72373>