| 1 |
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 07:21:02PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 6 May 2007 14:17:29 -0400 |
| 3 |
> Dan Meltzer <hydrogen@×××××××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > > which elog could easily be extended to do. |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > But which elog does not do by default, and for good reason. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > and what good reason would that be? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> That elog is designed for post-install messages that aren't necessarily |
| 11 |
> relevant to many users. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Elog is a general mechanism; einfo/ewarn/enotice (etc) are designed to |
| 14 |
seperate what's "relevant to users"- so you'll need a better reason :) |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
~harring |
Archives