From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mx1oA-00070V-4B for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:02:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F24F5E06D7; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:02:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org (mail.ukfsn.org [77.75.108.10]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9928E06D7 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:02:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A99E2041 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:02:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org ([192.168.54.25]) by localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Tuk2reoJu22 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:02:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from wstn.ethnet (unknown [78.32.181.186]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0706FDF96A for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:02:08 +0100 (BST) From: Peter Humphrey Organization: at home To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] What is a "packet"? Was: Checksum error Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:02:07 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <20091011090443.GE21168@solfire> <1255260168.126855.12.camel@centar> <200910111655.47494.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200910111655.47494.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200910111802.07332.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> X-Archives-Salt: 61e0f861-4826-4cc8-91b8-6ab8bdebf46b X-Archives-Hash: a824de8685203c48ed4603950bb32ce4 On Sunday 11 October 2009 15:55:47 Alan McKinnon wrote: > Well, at least now we know that English contains at least one word that is > less ambiguous than the German equivalent. > > I would not have thought it could be done. English contains many ambiguities, but if you know the current idiom they all disappear, or at least recede. The difficulty is in keeping up with the idiom. Personally, I prefer to rely on what I've known for the last 60 years or so and to hell with the trendies. Things like "its" = "belonging to it"; "it's" = "it is". -- Rgds Peter