Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/06/04/15:57:44
> I don't recommend anything except that I do recommend that if you have a
> problem and someone says "Fixed in the latest snapshot" you can
> 1) try the snapshot or
> 2) not try the snapshot, but don't keep describing a bug
> that may be fixed in the snapshot.
>
> In other words if I say "I fixed it, go here to try it". The
> correct response from you is not "It is not fixed" unless you've
> actually tried what I told you to try.
You did not say, "I fixed it, go here to try it".
You said :"And, I believe that this was a problem which was reported
back in April. If so, it's been fixed in snapshots for a while."
the key difference between those two statements is the word "believe".
My response was that my sample was different because my sample program
has two forks, where the april samples had one fork. the april
samples work on my sytem, my sample does not work on my system,
indicating that i had the code that fixed the april problem.
I also explained why it was difficult for me to try the new snapshots
hoping someone would have pity on my situation and try my example code on
the latest snapshot. (thanks corinna) I also reposted after someone
suggested I remove the depedency on ipc. I am not lazy as demonstrated
by the fact that I have _many_ hours
investing in isolating the problem from the 30,000 line program
to the 100 or so lines I posted.
I am a believer in the cygwin project and I am going to be working
my butt to help and promote cygwin.
As we speak, my sys admin is downloading and trying the latest
snapshot. We are currently dependent on cygipc, and it is my
understanding that cygipc is deprecated. This limits my ability
to test the latest snapshot with our full source code.
--
potter
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -