[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#29069: bug#31043: [PATCH] changed presentation in 'File permissions'
bug#29069: bug#31043: [PATCH] changed presentation in 'File permissions' in 'numeric, modes'
Tue, 3 Apr 2018 21:29:35 +0200
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
Am 03.04.2018 um 17:45 schrieb Paul Eggert:
> Thanks for mentioning the problem.
so you see a problem there too?
However, I found the proposed rewrite
> to be more confusing than the original.
It may me that my way of building sentences is quite amendable. I'm not
a native english writer.
But what do you think of my teaching concept, to try to explain why a
`7' in `755' means =4+2+1=111=rwx="rwx for owner", which is assumed as
self-evident or intuitive in both the original text and your patch?
I think part of the problem is
> that this is not really the place to explain octal notation;
maybe. But where would be a place, to formulate the problem `7=4+2+1'
more generally? and then to just refer to it?
> who doesn't know octal before reading the manual is not likely to
> understand it even with the proposed rewrite.
Because of what, do you think?
I think we should just
> give up and assume that the reader knows octal (if they don't they
> should be using symbolic modes)
if they don't miss any important features..
but why already giving up? does it seem so impossible to find a more
. That being said, we could briefly give
> an example of how the individual bits are combined into an octal digit,
> and rearrange the description to make it more intuitive. I installed the
> attached patch to try to improve things.
Why didn't you take over my correction from "are sometimes special" to
"have a special meaning for directories" ?
> I also merged Bug#31043 with Bug#29069 since they're the same topic.
The problem was, that when writing "Bug#29069" in the subject, nobody
responded to my patch proposal, which at the end was nearly to frustrating.