[Gllug] Building a patch

[Jack Bertram]

* Christian Smith <csmith at micromuse.com> [051207 16:51]:
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Jack Bertram wrote:
> 
> >* Nix <nix at esperi.org.uk> [051206 10:45]:
> >> should be no junk there in any case: you should write the change in
> >> a pristine tree, and then test it in an emphemeral copy of that tree,
> >                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
> >> so only that copy gets the build-time junk.)
> >
> >This is a fabulous typo; I have visions of an emphysemal tree with
> >shortness of breath, coughing, and lung disease brought on by inadequate
> >sterilisation of the working environment.
> >
> >Keep your working trees clean!  (And your build-time trees epheremal, to
> >be sure)
> 
> 
> [csmith at erol ~]$ dict epheremal
> No definitions found for "epheremal"

ah, bugger.  What's the Usenet law that says if you pick up a typo, then
there will be a typo in your post?  Of course I meant ephemeral.

> [csmith at erol ~]$ dict emphemeral
> No definitions found for "emphemeral", perhaps you mean:
> gcide:  Ephemeral
> wn:  ephemeral
> moby-thes:  ephemeral

Yes, there's no such word as emphemeral - but it looks like emphysemal,
(at least at the speed I read) which prompted my posting and gave me an
amusing visual image.  

> [csmith at erol ~]$ dict ephemeral
> ...
> 
> Looks like you're both wrong:) The word appears to be ephemeral.
> </pedant>

Yes.  Unlike our mistakes.

jack
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20051207/7429dfaf/attachment.pgp>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug