From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1E01384AE for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 17:11:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 476A321C031; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 17:11:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10DADE08EE for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 17:11:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicge5 with SMTP id ge5so87866527wic.0 for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 10:11:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cm6yMerZUz4FUJ10eKeZVgnZNWZVtYVHJZT/u7t43zg=; b=EyloR42rZS+LAbRyURNmLCy297qgS2RpLyGo75G1VHmT4oduLdbmtXlftaUT1UHYF7 jyzc45pKDafwaJ/mhn9G+U97t/aNyMh2kotKOeWzeWEOcIvulsNhFkoFpU9fAIZaARhd 5gV/NKnEgOTRpL+14mYAA7wIGE67sqLKIeeNTAkK6iBuRMUemLgCOWLanvnv37iubWUw KqJP5l39armUDh0rT9/4UD1Pe86GgG7vDQad65HTaae8wmOO+G/VWAFHd4QR4Br3Wak+ R/JKLXoiQlgf339C4LaleQiJoh80OZHGqfIXQ2Q/c3mszEayMDLhSSOmN6IxkH/ZGHvG GbCg== X-Received: by 10.194.117.70 with SMTP id kc6mr5761314wjb.13.1442769072761; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 10:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.0.41] (105-237-151-122.access.mtnbusiness.co.za. [105.237.151.122]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id gl4sm19858938wjb.29.2015.09.20.10.11.11 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 20 Sep 2015 10:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [OT] Re: [gentoo-user] mpv upgrade warning To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <55FD0392.2030908@gmail.com> <6168471.j2biIEi0Lp@wstn> <20150920101914.67b2bb4d@digimed.co.uk> <6276366.7GjlFkadlM@wstn> <20150920174005.7d6dd928@digimed.co.uk> From: Alan McKinnon Message-ID: <55FEE899.8060201@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 19:10:49 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 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 In-Reply-To: <20150920174005.7d6dd928@digimed.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: fae8a814-5bf7-400d-8323-3953edeff264 X-Archives-Hash: b05f039381929cfa065df97985627d9e On 20/09/2015 18:40, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 13:45:18 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote: > >>> One of the OED definitions of readable is "interesting or pleasant to >>> read". I stand by my original statement, argumentative pedants >>> notwithstanding. :P >> >> I agree with you. It's Alan I called a pedant for trying to split hairs. > > I know, a wonderful case of the pot calling the kettle black :P > >> I had a trial version of OED* on my mobile, but it was not good so I've >> reverted to Chambers, which includes "legible" as its first definition >> of Readable, and "clear enough to be deciphered" as its first >> definition of Legible. > > I have a proper printed OED, all 1800 pages of it. If you don't have it in the morning anymore, it's because I broken into you house and stole it. You lucky bugger you. I've wanted such a dictionary for years -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com