Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/03/30/14:37:29
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:20:16AM -0800, Jim Kleckner wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:57:44AM -0800, Jim Kleckner wrote:
>
>>>Then strike the link text and limit it to the workaround of adding
>>>the bin to the system path. My text was a suggested starting point.
>>
>>i.e., a workaround.
>>
>>>>The solution that the DLL has to be in the system path is not required
>>>>for a sanctioned Cygwin release. But, then, we've seen before that
>>>>clamwin insists on running in a non-cygwin environment. I don't want
>>>>to be in the business of adding advice to the FAQ for fixing up other
>>>>people's problems.
>>>
>>>Nobody said the workaround was required.
>>
>>
>>See above.
>
>Above does not say the workaround is required nor did the original
>text.
Ah, semantic fun. Ok. I do not want to have an entry in the FAQ which
"suggests" a workaround of setting the system PATH environment variable
to work around other people's problems.
>You complain about 3PPs but don't want to provide any easily found
>directions to them about what not to do. You can say "search the list"
>but as a practical matter, it isn't effective at guiding their
>behavior.
Corinna already said that she thought that instructions are a good idea.
I am not against providing instructions to 3PPs. As I said today:
>The problem with a "third party packager's guide" is that it would have
>to be written by a third party who understands the whole deal. I'm not
>aware of anyone actually trying to do this right.
On rereading this thread, I see that you've volunteered to come up to
speed on this subject so, maybe I was wrong.
Patches tacitly awaited.
cgf
--
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 -