Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3DC1F0A0.D1E3388E@yahoo.com>
Date:	Thu, 31 Oct 2002 22:10:24 -0500
From:	CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	cbfalconer AT worldnet DOT att DOT net
Organization:	Ched Research
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: gdb hangs on a 486
References:	<3DC0ADF3 DOT AE21B991 AT yahoo DOT com> <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20021031083212 DOT 017487d8 AT pop DOT rcn DOT com> <20021031193110 DOT GH18735 AT redhat DOT com> <3DC1C38B DOT 95C34E40 AT yahoo DOT com> <20021101020930 DOT GA19974 AT redhat DOT com>

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 06:58:03PM -0500, CBFalconer wrote:
> 
> >Unfortunately that is all the data there is.  I don't expect a magic
> >wand.  The problem is probably in the gui stuff gdb is calling anyhow.
> >W98 is not noted for system protection.  However ignoring it is NOT the
> >right answer.
> 
> Noting that a string on the screen says "i686", concluding that since
> you don't have a i686 this is the cause of all of your problems, and
> continuing to hold to that belief after you've been told it is unlikely,
> is not the right answer either.

I did NOT say that.  I did say, in effect, that I was speculating,
and in one message that it would be worthwhile to record and
publicize what a package was compiled for.  I also said that this
system is and has been rock solid until the gdb-gui episode.  I am
well aware that noone is going to go out and look for anything as
nebulous as this.  With luck though, sometime somebody may say to
themself "AHA - this may explain that".  Provided the "that" has
been mentioned in public.

> 
> >Maybe a few mirrors should be set aside for systems with other
> >configurations.
> 
> And now we segue into YA misconception this time it's about how
> mirrors work.
> 
> What fun.

Maybe the word is wrong, but such a separation (assuming that
there is a reason to do it at all) would make matching packages to
machine capabilities trivial.  The user, via setup or the
equivalent, selects a machine type, and the appropriate list of
'mirrors' appears.  Each such 'mirror' does its updating from an
appropriate set of source directories.

I fail to see the usefulness of sarcasm here.  Or should I assume
that, like Microsoft, perfection has already been attained and
that questioning is futile?  Have you met Dan Pop yet?  He is very
knowledgeable.

As far as multiple messages is concerned, my ISP hiccupped.  It is
rare, but has been known to happen.  I apologize for the
inconvenience.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com) (cbfalconer AT worldnet DOT att DOT net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!



--
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 -