[PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Alan Cox]

The verb form is "journalised". Confirmed with the OED and BCS

Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>

diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude linux.vanilla-2.6.25-mm1/fs/hfsplus/super.c linux-2.6.25-mm1/fs/hfsplus/super.c
--- linux.vanilla-2.6.25-mm1/fs/hfsplus/super.c	2008-04-28 11:36:50.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.25-mm1/fs/hfsplus/super.c	2008-05-02 13:37:20.000000000 +0100
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@
 			sb->s_flags |= MS_RDONLY;
 			*flags |= MS_RDONLY;
 		} else if (vhdr->attributes & cpu_to_be32(HFSPLUS_VOL_JOURNALED)) {
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "hfs: filesystem is marked journaled, leaving read-only.\n");
+			printk(KERN_WARNING "hfs: filesystem is marked journalised, leaving read-only.\n");
 			sb->s_flags |= MS_RDONLY;
 			*flags |= MS_RDONLY;
 		}

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Frans Pop]

Alan Cox wrote:
> The verb form is "journalised". Confirmed with the OED and BCS

But daily usage stats say something completely different (google):
journaled:   1,540,000 hits
journalized:   129,000 hits
journalised:     8,340 hits

BTW, what is common spelling in the kernel British or American English?

If you search for it with "file system" added, you get:
journaled:     134,000 hits ( 8.7% of above total)
journalized:     3,290 hits ( 2.5%)
journalised:     1,890 hits (22.7%)

So "journalized" is even less common when talking about file systems than it 
is in other contexts.
Guess the high percentage for "journalised" is your doing? ;-)

I don't see this as an improvement.

Cheers,
FJP

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Alan Cox]

> BTW, what is common spelling in the kernel British or American English?

It varies. The fs journal code uses both at random sometimes mixed in the
same paragraph. Fortunately "to journalise" is valid in both US and UK
English.

> journaled:     134,000 hits ( 8.7% of above total)

Almost entirely caused by Linux.

> I don't see this as an improvement.

Actually using proper language is most definitely an improvement. Right
now we are using incorrect made up words. Not only that we are using
incorrect made up words when the computing professional bodies also say
that our choice is wrong.

Alan

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Frans Pop]

On Friday 02 May 2008, Alan Cox wrote:
> > BTW, what is common spelling in the kernel British or American English?
>
> It varies. The fs journal code uses both at random sometimes mixed in the
> same paragraph. Fortunately "to journalise" is valid in both US and UK
> English.

Well, my spellchecker rejects the -se but recognizes the -ze. It also has no 
problems with journaled.

> > journaled:     134,000 hits ( 8.7% of above total)
>
> Almost entirely caused by Linux.

Sure. But that only proves my point: once something has been accepted as 
common language and a term, however technically wrong, is recognized to 
stand for something by the majority of existing users, it is probably wrong 
to change it. After all, language is a living and evolving thing. This is 
exactly how new words, terms and simplifications are introduced.

Google clearly shows that journaled is the accepted, and thus preferred 
term. Maybe if you'd proposed this patch (and others everywhere else 
journaled has been used) 5 years ago you'd been right. At this stage I 
think a change would only confuse.

Cheers,
FJP

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Alan Cox]

> Google clearly shows that journaled is the accepted, and thus preferred 
> term. Maybe if you'd proposed this patch (and others everywhere else 

No google shows that Linux is referenced a lot.

> journaled has been used) 5 years ago you'd been right. At this stage I 
> think a change would only confuse.

You may do. I don't, and I would point out that having a proper
dictionary term is enormously important to people who meet a term they
not met before.

Finally I put more weight on the views of the professional bodies for
computing than on you ;)

Alan

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Alan Cox wrote:
> Finally I put more weight on the views of the professional bodies for
> computing than on you ;)
>   

Prescriptive arguments from authority don't really carry much weight.  
In this case it's particularly weak since Apple refer to hfs as a 
"journaled" or "journaling" filesystem[1].

And now I've been staring at it for so long that its just turned into a 
weird word...

    J

[1] http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=107249

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Alan Cox]

> Prescriptive arguments from authority don't really carry much weight.  
> In this case it's particularly weak since Apple refer to hfs as a 
> "journaled" or "journaling" filesystem[1].

Indeed.

> And now I've been staring at it for so long that its just turned into a 
> weird word...

Rotfl - it's not that important so lets forget about it if it upsets
people so much

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[SL Baur]

On 5/2/08, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:

> Actually using proper language is most definitely an improvement. Right
>  now we are using incorrect made up words. Not only that we are using
>  incorrect made up words when the ...

Alan, you misunderestimate[1] how important Linux has become.  Linux is
important and pervasive enough that you have the ability to make any new
word you wish, like well, "Linux".

(Although I do hope and pray that "propogate" never becomes an accepted
spelling).

>  computing professional bodies also say that our choice is wrong.

And Microsoft says deploying Linux is "risky".  Are we supposed to care?

I've changed my mind on this issue.  I think we should keep "journaled" in
the sources.  It makes sense and if future dictionaries credit the etymology of
that word to Linux kernel developers, so much the better.

-sb

[1] Inside joke on USians.

Re: [PATCH] hfsplus: Correct user visible printk

[Frans Pop]

On Saturday 03 May 2008, SL Baur wrote:
> (Although I do hope and pray that "propogate" never becomes an accepted
> spelling).

A fellow Debian Installer developer has been know to use "propigate" :-)

With 21,000 google hits (adding to that now!), it's admittedly a lot less 
popular than "propogate" (with 283,000; even has a wiktionary entry).

I share your prayers though, for both.

Cheers,
FJP