Mail Archives: pgcc/1999/04/19/12:24:48
At 17:29 19/04/99 +0200, you wrote:
>Quoting foo_fighter01 AT gmx DOT net (foo_fighter01 AT gmx DOT net):
>> Hi,
>> wenn Du was zu sagen hast oder Hilfe brauchst dann subskribiere diese
>> Mailing List. Ansonsten shut up!
>Thanks for your friendly response!
Ok, maybe he overreacted a bit, but being on the list myself I can
easily understand his reaction.
When the dead same error message keeps getting posted to the list
over 30 times (I didn't count but it can't be far off), you start
to lose your temper. If those (harsh words) people would just bother
to lurk ONE day or look up the archives, they would find the answer
to their question.
If you're using a program and want help for it the least you can
do is subscribe to the mailinglist.
>Here i cite from http://www.goof.com/pcg/questions.html:
>
> Questions on PentiumGCC
>
> If you have any problems installing gcc using gcc
> or getting rid of gcc, there are a number of
> possibilities for you:
>
> -(Read the FAQ. o.k. i did that)
> -Write an e-mail to the mailing list, describing your problem
> (and clearly stating that you
> are NOT on the mailing list, so that people can send the answer
> directly to you)
>
>I thought, since pgcc-1.1.2 is a release and not a development-snapshot,
>the people who do the work for it (that's not you - is it?) would
>be interested in bug messages.
Yes they are. But having to spend time reading an error 30 times isn't
exactly fun for them either and keeps them from their work.
As for what you quote from the site, I (personally) think its a lot
better to just say: "get on the mailiglist, and wait at least a day
or two before posting".
>
>> Seit Erscheinen des PGCC-EGCS-1.1.2-Patches tauchen hier
>> ständig die selben Fehlermeldungen auf (ca. 50, meist von Leuten, die
>> nicht subskribiert sind) and that sucks.
>> Der Patch is broken und das wüßtes Du wenn du die Listen abonieren
>> würdest. (Übrigens Leute die per CC Antworten wollen, bekommen diese
>> meistens nicht!).
>If that's the case, this should be in the FAQ.
No. The patch should have been removed as soon as the error was
detected.
In my culture, it is considered polite to first listen to what
a conversation ia about and then join in. I find it annoying this
doesn't seem to be the case everywhere.
The "CC:" idea is plain stupid and common sense will tell you that.
As a solution gets discussed you can't expect everyone to remind
to CC whoever posted the problem first. The solution often doesn't
reach them.
"Post here read here" is said on Usenet. It should apply to
mailingslists too.
>> Der Maintainer sollte diese Liste für non-subscriber schließen.
>Please leave this decision to the maintainer.
I hope my comments convinced him or her to do so, as I am completely
in favor of closing the list to non-subscribers.
>
>[previous problem description deleted]
Yeah yeah we've heard that a million times already. ;-)
>
>Bye,
>Martin
PS. If I am not mistaken, this is actually my first post to the list.
This subjectively puts me in a bad postion to discuss such topics.
I hope though that my views on what I consider basic politeness have
convinced some people to do things differently next time they post a
problem.
Yours sincerely,
Gian-Carlo
- Raw text -