Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 09/02/09 07:08 CST: > Hi, > I notice there is an inconsistency in the use of either 'Required Patch' > or 'Required patch' among the packages. Which form should we be using? > or does it not matter? > Regards, > Wayne.
I thought I had fixed all these at one time. Oh well. Here's a sample of data: ra...@rmlscsi: ~/Books/BLFS/BOOK > grep -lr "Required patch" * | grep -v \.svn-base$ | wc -l 63 ra...@rmlscsi: ~/Books/BLFS/BOOK > grep -lr "Required Patch" * | grep -v \.svn-base$ | wc -l 38 There are also many places where there is descriptive text along with the patch, and that text is lower case. So, unless someone can come up with a reason to not to, let's use the lower case variety. I will run a sed and change all "Required Patch", to "Required patch". I may do a few more greps looking for plural instances and what not. -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 07:24:00 up 14:00, 1 user, load average: 0.35, 0.18, 0.06 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
