On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 01:42:07 GMT
k...@freefriends.org (Karl Berry) wrote:
it addresses an issue that
some people may not know about, so maybe it would be good to
briefly explain further?
I agree, thanks. I changed the text to look like this:
By default, the Make rules should
it addresses an issue that
some people may not know about, so maybe it would be good to briefly
explain further?
I agree, thanks. I changed the text to look like this:
By default, the Make rules should compile and link with @samp{-g}, so
that executable programs have debugging
[ adding bug-standards; this thread is from
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2010-11/msg00114.html ]
* MK wrote on Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 04:47:48PM CET:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 10:07:31 +0900 Miles Bader wrote:
Indeed, it's often a good idea to do the research _before_ posting
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:44:10 +0100
Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de wrote:
Oh well. This thread has been so noisy and unproductive, maybe we
should seize the opportunity to take a bit of good away from it.
Karl, what do you think about this rewording (against the gnulib copy
of
Karl, what do you think about this rewording
The second hunk adds real information, so I'll go ahead and install that.
The first hunk, though, I just can't agree with, and I feel pretty sure
that rms would not approve of such a change either. Helpless is a
good description of people faced
You need to remember the original target audience of GNU software was a
group of people that wanted to share free software. Most of them were
students or researchers that generally built software distributed in
source form. Only in the last 10 years has Linux become generally
popular. Before that
John Calcote john.calc...@gmail.com writes:
You need to remember the original target audience of GNU software was
a group of people that wanted to share free software. Most of them
were students or researchers that generally built software distributed
in source form.
...
That being the case,
k...@freefriends.org (Karl Berry) writes:
I personally would not have written it that way in the first place, but
given that it is there now, I don't want to simply replace it with bland
text, or occupy rms's time with it, either.
Yeah, I think there's nothing particularly offensive about that
