1 |
On 2013-07-31, Bruce Hill <daddy@×××××××××××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 01:09:03PM -0500, Canek Pel?ez Vald?s wrote: |
3 |
>>> |
4 |
>>> Hmmmn, it's a bit freaking weird - if I'm understanding correctly |
5 |
>>> some of the statements made here about systemd - that there will be |
6 |
>>> files installed to /etc/init.d/ that don't actually do anything. |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> If you use systemd, all the files installed in /etc/init.d (except |
9 |
>> functions.sh) don't actually do nothing. If you use OpenRC, all the |
10 |
>> files installed in /urs/lib/systemd/system don't actually do nothing. |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> Whichever you use (OpenRC or systemd), you will have files in both |
13 |
>> locations (actually, a bunch of them), and therefore one of those |
14 |
>> locations will have files that don't actually do nothing. |
15 |
>> |
16 |
>> Unless you use INSTALL_MASK, which is of course what this is all about. |
17 |
|
18 |
> In English "don't actually do nothing" means "do something"; i.e. "don't |
19 |
> actually do anything" != "don't actually do nothing". |
20 |
|
21 |
In standard, formal English, that's correct. |
22 |
|
23 |
However, in some English dialects, a double-negatve does not equate to |
24 |
a positive. A double negative is simply a stronger negative. For |
25 |
example, "don't do nothing" is a stronger, more emphatic version of |
26 |
"don't do anything". Languages like that have "negative concord". |
27 |
Old and Middle English were that way, and some modern dialects of |
28 |
English are that way. |
29 |
|
30 |
-- |
31 |
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Either CONFESS now or |
32 |
at we go to "PEOPLE'S COURT"!! |
33 |
gmail.com |