2007-12-22 14:09:48

by Benny Amorsen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Trailing periods in kernel messages

[email protected] (Lennart Sorensen) writes:

> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:55:16PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> o_O I better continue believing it is the subject. Because with
>> one extra word at the front, you can make this a "complete sentence":
>>
>> Please initialize [the] current offset in xfs_file_readdir.
>
> That still looks like an incomplete sentence, although orders are often
> given in that form. Something like these seem more like complete
> sentences:

It's simply the imperative. You can make perfectly good English
sentences in just one word -- "Eat." is an example. See more at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperative_mood.

It is a bit of a mystery why the kernel is ordering me to initialize
the current offset of xfs_file_readdir though. I don't know how to do
that, so I guess it's lucky that I don't use XFS. Who knows what would
happen if I didn't correctly initialize xfs_file_readdir.


/Benny


2007-12-22 20:26:06

by Radoslaw Szkodzinski

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Trailing periods in kernel messages

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:04:16 +0100
Benny Amorsen <[email protected]> wrote:
> It is a bit of a mystery why the kernel is ordering me to initialize
> the current offset of xfs_file_readdir though. I don't know how to do
> that, so I guess it's lucky that I don't use XFS. Who knows what would
> happen if I didn't correctly initialize xfs_file_readdir.

I thinks it's not the kernel ordering you, it's the developer ordering
the kernel to initialize that variable - presumably, because when it
didn't do that, things broke.


Attachments:
signature.asc (189.00 B)