| 1 |
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 16:30:07 -0400 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 5 |
> <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:55:47 -0400 |
| 7 |
> > Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> The --unmerge option is there to let people shoot themselves in the |
| 11 |
> >> feet if they know what they're doing. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Not sure why anyone would have objection to such a warning like |
| 14 |
> > exists for other things. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I don't think I've seen anybody raise such an objection. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Then why are we talking -c vs -C, when BOTH need more output... |
| 19 |
If there is no objection, why all the emails on -c vs -C? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Neither using -c nor -C addresses the issues I am mentioning with |
| 22 |
either. Yet people keep on about those two things and missing the |
| 23 |
actual point. Which you say there is no objection. Maybe there is no |
| 24 |
understanding rather than objection. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If people understood, then saying use -c or -C makes no sense. It does |
| 27 |
not address the lack of output from either I am talking about. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives