stosss at gmail.com
Wed Feb 10 12:35:25 PST 2010
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> wrote:
> stosss wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> stosss wrote:
>>>> Also what is the point of a nightly snapshot if the book has not changed?
>>> Because it is set up as a cron job and I didn't go to the effort of
>>> trying to figure out if any of the 300 or so pages changed.
>>> Most people will look at the document itself, especially the change log,
>>> to see what changes have been made.
>> That is exactly what I did. According to the change Log the book has
>> not changed in 7 days. I also put this in one of my earlier posts on
>> this thread.
> What's your point?
My original point was to find out what was different between the 02/03
and 02/09 snapshots since there did not appear to be any. Then my new
point was to question the reason for generating new snapshots if
Why is it that you and other developers are so touchy about the book
and its condition and people pointing out things that could be done
different, better or whatever? Why do you and the others insist on
thinking there is nothing wrong with the book and so unwilling to
More information about the blfs-support