Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> wrote:
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> writes:
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
"Hendrik Schober" <boost@HSchober.de> 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@gmx.de 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