Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 23:28:39 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: Syzop Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: gcc not producing executables Message-ID: <20011225042839.GA30901@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: Syzop , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <3C27F4DA DOT 100D636A AT dds DOT nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C27F4DA.100D636A@dds.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i On Tue, Dec 25, 2001 at 04:39:06AM +0100, Syzop wrote: >>cygcheck -c binutils >> >>will do the same thing. > >I should have known that: >$ cygcheck --help >Usage: cygcheck [OPTIONS] [program ...] > -s, --sysinfo = system information (not with -k) > -v, --verbose = verbose output (indented) (for -s or programs) > -r, --registry = registry search (requires -s) > -k, --keycheck = perform a keyboard check session (not with -s) > -h, --help = give help about the info >You must at least give either -s or -k or a program name > >cq: maybe the --help info could be updated Or maybe you could read the cygwin email archives where this observation has been made more than once. Or, maybe you could read the online documentation where this option is mentioned. It's obviously an oversight in the help output. It's corrected in the sources but I'm not going to make a new cygwin release just to fix the cygcheck help. I wasn't berating you for not doing the right thing. I was merely explaining YA that there was a more efficient way to do this. >Anyway I'm more interrested in getting my gcc back alive. Have fun. 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/