Re: [ITP] wtf

Igor Pechtchanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ronald, > > Replies inline below. > > On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:56:57AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > Great, that makes 3 votes. Now all I have to do is get someone to review > > > t

Re: [ITP] wtf

On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Charles Wilson wrote: > Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > Great. Is the packaging structure ok? Should I move the manpages to > > /usr/share/man while I'm at it? > > I think so. While recompiling all of my packages (again) for 1.5.1, I > moved all documentation into /usr/share/

Re: [ITP] wtf

On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 07:58:36 -0400 (EDT), "Igor Pechtchanski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Ah, I thought so. Ok, then, how about I leave them in /usr/man for now, > and move them to /usr/share/man when I recompile the package against > 1.5.*? Sounds like a plan. -- Charles Wilson cygwin at rem

Re: [ITP] wtf

Igor Pechtchanski wrote: Great. Is the packaging structure ok? Should I move the manpages to /usr/share/man while I'm at it? I think so. While recompiling all of my packages (again) for 1.5.1, I moved all documentation into /usr/share/* since that seemed to (a) make sense, (b) have some supp

Re: [ITP] wtf

On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 10:21:35PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:56:57AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > > Great, that makes 3 votes. Now all I have to do is get someone to review > > > the packaging (nudge,

Re: [ITP] wtf

Ronald, Replies inline below. On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:56:57AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > Great, that makes 3 votes. Now all I have to do is get someone to review > > the packaging (nudge, nudge, wink, wink). > FWIW, I've installed

Re: [ITP] wtf

On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 08:56:57AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > Great, that makes 3 votes. Now all I have to do is get someone to review > the packaging (nudge, nudge, wink, wink). FWIW, I've installed the binary - it seems to be working nicely. I've tried bowth wtf and wtfindex. I've also re

Re: [ITP] wtf

Great, that makes 3 votes. Now all I have to do is get someone to review the packaging (nudge, nudge, wink, wink). I don't see a particular value in weeding out duplicates, as all variants will be displayed, so no information is lost. However, I'll see if I could "hide" the original acronyms...

Re: [ITP] wtf

Has my vote, Just a small note, though: most of the OLOCA acronyms are a lot more verbose than their wtf counterparts, and some of them are duplicates. would it be possible to adapt your Perl script to weed out the (exact) duplicates? JAT (*) rlc (*) JAT: Just A Thought - neither in wtf nor th

RE: [ITP] wtf

Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > As per John Morrison's suggestion, I would like to contribute and > maintain wtf > (http://cronus.comp.utas.edu.au/~thsutton/computing/wtf.html). > > wtf(6) is a utility provided by some UNIX and UNIX-like systems > including Slackware Linux and NetBSD. It translates a

Re: [ITP] wtf

On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 08:17:11PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > As per John Morrison's suggestion, I would like to contribute and maintain > wtf (http://cronus.comp.utas.edu.au/~thsutton/computing/wtf.html). > > wtf(6) is a utility provided by some UNIX and UNIX-like systems including > Slack

[ITP] wtf

As per John Morrison's suggestion, I would like to contribute and maintain wtf (http://cronus.comp.utas.edu.au/~thsutton/computing/wtf.html). wtf(6) is a utility provided by some UNIX and UNIX-like systems including Slackware Linux and NetBSD. It translates acronyms and filename suffixes by looki