From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 30 13:51:29 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1114A16A4CE; Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:51:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from pittgoth.com (14.zlnp1.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.149.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52C0943D45; Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:51:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (acs-24-154-239-203.zoominternet.net [24.154.239.203]) by pittgoth.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id hBULpPCv007517; Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:51:26 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:51:28 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes To: "Bruce A. Mah" Message-Id: <20031230165128.7f4772aa.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20031230214617.GA37863@intruder.kitchenlab.org> References: <200312301749.hBUHnJjx004040@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031230132034.36281ba6.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> <20031230214617.GA37863@intruder.kitchenlab.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.6claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Marc Fonvieille cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml X-BeenThere: cvs-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the doc and www trees List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:51:29 -0000 On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:46:17 -0800 "Bruce A. Mah" wrote: > If memory serves me right, Tom Rhodes wrote: > > [Taken off cvs-all since it's a -doc issue] > > > > On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:49:19 -0800 (PST) > > Marc Fonvieille wrote: > > > > - Use option tags for command line options instead of literal ones. > > > > Using option tags? I've been using literal for awhile since another > > committer told me that they always use literal over option for > > flags. Which one is preferred? > > > > FWIW, I think it was bmah who said that to me during my working > > of the cron(8) section, but please don't quote me on that. :) > > Hmmm...I don't *think* that was me but I'm not sure. I use > for marking up "those optional things you put on a > command line that usually start with a dash". I use > as a fallback for other things, same as a couple > of other people have already said. Well I didn't want to put words in your mouth that why I used 'I think' with a 'don't quote me' comment. :) -- Tom Rhodes