Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 11:50:02 -0700 (PDT) From: "Alexander N. Kabaev" <ak03@gte.com> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/18467: Small type in kobj man page Message-ID: <200005091850.LAA10475@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR docs/18467; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Alexander N. Kabaev" <ak03@gte.com>
To: Mike Pritchard <mpp@mppsystems.com>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: docs/18467: Small type in kobj man page
Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 14:43:14 -0400 (EDT)
Yes, but is it fine to use both spellings on the same page? I still believe
that 'despatch' should be changed to dispatch to be consistent with the rest
of the page.
On 09-May-00 Mike Pritchard wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2000 at 12:05:39PM -0400, ak03@gte.com wrote:
>> >Number: 18467
>> >Category: docs
>> >Synopsis: Simple typo in man page
>> >Description:
>>
>> dispatching spelled as despatching in man page
>>
>> >How-To-Repeat:
>>
>> man kobj
>
>>From "dict despatch":
>
>>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
>
> Despatch \De*spatch"\, n. & v.
> Same as {Dispatch}.
>
> Dispatch \Dis*patch"\, n. [Cf. OF. despeche, F. d['e]p[^e]che.
> See {Dispatch}, v. t.] [Written also {despatch}.]
>
>
> Looks like this spelling is fine.
>
> -Mike
> --
> Mike Pritchard
> mpp@FreeBSD.org or mpp@mppsystems.com
----------------------------------
E-Mail: Alexander N. Kabaev <ak03@gte.com>
Date: 09-May-00
Time: 14:39:17
----------------------------------
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200005091850.LAA10475>