Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/05/01/14:15:47
I'll point out that there is also a significant difference between a
direct response and gratuitous insults.
William Sutton
On Fri, 1 May 2009, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 04:52:21PM +0200, jurriaan AT rivierenland DOT xs4all DOT nl wrote:
>> From: Mark J. Reed <markjreed AT gmail DOT com>
>> Date: Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:31:13AM -0400
>>> This has come up before; an archive search might save some repetition.
>>
>> Yes, sorry about that. I can understand that the output of ps is used
>> in scripts. I find it harder to understand that adding a new flag to
>> ps would also break those scripts,
>
> You're assuming a fact not in evidence.
>
>> but what I'd love most and suspect would keep this question from
>> popping up and getting everybody excited now and again would be a small
>> line in the ps man page.
>
> Well, the current "excitement" was apparently because I provided a one
> line direct response to a question rather than assuming that what was
> actually being asked for was a history lesson and a reminder that
> patches are thoughtfuly considered. Little did I know that there was an
> indignant person out there who was capable of speaking for lots of
> Cygwin users who languished in ignorance on this subject.
>
> Languishing aside, however, if someone is willing to provide a patch to
> provide a new option and new functionality, it will be given the same
> attention that we always give to patches.
>
> 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/
>
>
--
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 -