Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: RE: Accessing remote PC (ssh?)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:58:11 -0000
Message-ID: <84952F09F3FC0C418393E60D116EB9CC180C4D@Traf-Mail.int.ascribe.com>
From: "Phil Betts" <Phil.Betts@ascribe.com>
To: <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Dave Korn wrote on Thursday, March 15, 2007 4:50 PM::

> On 15 March 2007 16:28, Phil Betts wrote:
> 
> [talk list snipped, no need to x-post]
> 

I didn't cross post, I set the reply to field to the talk list.  I
just forgot to point out it was TITTTL'd.

>   It's considered good netiquette that if you post a problem to a
> list, and later find a solution, you post a followup saying what the
> solution was, http://cygwin.com/acronyms#FTR.  That way, any time
> someone has the same problem again and stumbles across your post in
> the archive, they'll be able to find the solution with it.

I agree totally, but the given "solution" was to a question that 
hadn't been posed.

Rather it was a response to his own post about how he'd worked out 
(by reference to a very recently decried site) how to implement your 
answer to the original question, which (as you pointed out) he'd 
already answered himself in the subject line of the initial post.

Although my attention has now lapsed somewhat, it appears from the 
continuing thread that I was right to flag up, albeit in an oblique 
manner, that the "solution" given was perhaps not of the highest
provenance.

--
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/