Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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
Reply-To:	Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Message-Id:	<6.1.0.6.0.20041122112004.04344850@pop.prospeed.net>
X-Sender:
Date:	Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:31:01 -0500
To:	"Chuck" <SkiLover AT softhome DOT net>, "Cygwin List" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
From:	Larry Hall <lh-no-personal-replies-please AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: pax available?
In-Reply-To:	<000a01c4d09d$d03d7cf0$55dcd40a@advancemags.com>
References:	<002001c4ce54$81931010$55dcd40a AT advancemags DOT com> <6 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20041119134035 DOT 04d6e930 AT pop DOT prospeed DOT net> <000e01c4ce7f$9a71e360$55dcd40a AT advancemags DOT com> <6 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20041119170251 DOT 04bdc528 AT pop DOT prospeed DOT net> <000a01c4d09d$d03d7cf0$55dcd40a AT advancemags DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0

At 09:16 AM 11/22/2004, you wrote:

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Larry Hall" <xx AT xx DOT xxx>
>To: "Chuck" <xxx AT xx DOT xx>; "Cygwin List" <x AT x DOT xxx>
>Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 5:09 PM
>Subject: Re: pax available?

Don't feed the spammers.  They're fat enough already.
<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>

>> At 04:34 PM 11/19/2004, you wrote:
>> >What does any of this have to do with pax? The FAQ doesn't mention
>anything
>> >about pax or archiving in general?
>>
>>
>> Again:
>>
>> "What packages should I download? Where are 'make', 'gcc', 'vi', etc?"
>>
>> Missed the point?  OK, let's break it down:
>>
>> "What packages should I download?"
>>
>> You asked in what package was "pax".  See any similarities?
>
>No
>
>> OK, hopefully
>> something correlates for you here now.  Let's move on:
>>
>> "Where are 'make', 'gcc', 'vi', etc?"
>
>Again, what does this have to do with pax? So far you've answered every
>question except the one I asked. Is there some point to all this?
>
>>
>> "etc" is the operative term here.  You can substitute "pax".  Does the FAQ
>> entry make sense to you now?
>
>No. As previously stated, the FAQ mentions nothing about pax. Thankfully
>there are some on this list server who are more interested in giving
>straight answers than simply trying to argue.  Perhaps *you* should read the
>FAQ and tell us all where pax is mentioned at all.


Actually, I wasn't arguing.  I was asking a question.  I got my answer and
there's clearly no way the FAQ could help you.  There's no chance that we
could list every possible package someone might look for there and without
doing that, folks like you are still going to come to the list with questions
like yours. :-(  My point was that you can find out if *any* utility is 
available in a Cygwin package by visiting <http://cygwin.com/packages/>. 
In your case, that would have told you that there isn't a Cygwin package
with pax, which isn't what you were looking for but would have at least
given you that information.  In general, this is where to go to find the
answer to "Where is <foo>?" where <foo> is the utility of interest.



--
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746                     


--
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 -