Date:	Thu, 15 Jul 1999 09:03:34 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Steven Taylor <s_taylor AT primus DOT com DOT au>
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: the solution !!
In-Reply-To:	<931963239.133070@diddley.primus.com.au>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990715085909.10443B-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, Steven Taylor wrote:

> > Sorry for breaking your happy mood, but this is not the right solution;
> > it could cause you trouble later.
> 
> "Right" is such a subjective word.

My definition of "right solution" is the one that corrects or eliminates 
the cause of the problem.  In this case, the cause of the problem is an 
incorrect setting of a RHIDE-specific environment variable, not the name 
of a file.

> Consider this solution in the alpha test phase.

I was replying to someone who *renamed* the file libstdcxx.a to 
libstdcx.a.  That is not even a partial solution, it's simply plain 
wrong and dangerous, and will surely get the user into a lot of trouble 
down the road.

> As an alpha tester myself, I'm reporting that it works well with no
> side effects. All other "alpha testers" I have talked to report the same.

Wait until you upgrade to a newer version of the C++ library and
forget to copy the new version as you did with the old.

Personally, it evades me why would somebody insist on alpha-testing a
semi-solution when the right one is already tested to death, and is
clearly documented for everybody to see, at least in two places.

- Raw text -