Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 20:45:10 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: which getopt.c is cygwin1.dll using? Message-ID: <20011129014510.GA10594@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 05:37:03PM -0800, Downey, Nathan wrote: >I wasnt trying to be accusing. :) BTW: forgot to run my spellchecker through >the last post, me bad. I didn't think that you were trying to be accusing. I was hoping that you might use that as a goad to actually do a little research, since this is one of those many cygwin issues that have already been discussed in this mailing list. It's also one of the hundreds of cases where we make a change because someone complains that they can't compile package foo and after the change someone complains that they can't build package bar. In other words, we can never win. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/