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
X-Originating-IP:	[203.29.131.4]
X-Originating-Email:	[arashp AT hotmail DOT com]
X-Sender:	arashp AT hotmail DOT com
From:	"Arash Partow" <arashp AT hotmail DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Unable to compile cygwin
Date:	Mon, 22 Dec 2003 21:54:43 +0000
Mime-Version:	1.0
Message-ID:	<BAY9-F16kERMwSuWPjm00018ce5@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	22 Dec 2003 21:54:44.0005 (UTC) FILETIME=[35586D50:01C3C8D6]
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

proving a negative is much harder than proving a positive...


Arash Partow


>On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 11:15:34AM -0800, Shankar Unni wrote:
>Jim Ramsay wrote:
>>Ha! Ask that boss to prove to you that there is no security problem
>>running Windows on a 'secure' network.
>
>To a person with that mentality, Bill Gates is implicitly trustworthy
>(i.e.  if he says it's true, it must be true by definition, because
>it's a "big company that stands by its products"), while anything Open
>Source is written by h4x0rs and thus must "prove its trustworthiness".
>
>How, you ask them?  They don't know, but you'd better "know".  No point
>arguing with them..
>
>Proving the trustworthiness of any important system is never a waste of
>time.
>
>
>cgf

_________________________________________________________________
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -