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 Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: perlspinr AT att DOT net To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: try try again Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 21:10:52 +0000 Message-Id: <20020528211054.VBYY13408.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> > On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 08:18:00PM +0000, perlspinr AT att DOT net wrote: > >Still hoping that someone will find this important enough to answer. > > > >An updated detail is that I can override the value of "MACHTYPE" and > >"HOSTTYPE" in Cygwin per se, but not in MSYS -- Earnie? CC:ing you > >this time. > > Again, this is *not* an Msys mailing list. I find the concept of a > cygwin fork annoying enough without having to see discussion of it here. > > If you have msys questions seek elsewhere. > > As to why it isn't i586 on your Pentium, after a cursory glance at the > source (gasp!), it's obviously because this was the configuration > triplet used to build bash. Performing complicated "what type of cpu is > this?" checks is really not something I'd want my shell to spend time > on. So bash apaprently wisely just provides information based on whatever > it was built for. > > If you need better information, use uname. I need proper information for makefiles to get, and I *am* using uname to get that info. It's wrong too (I am NOT at that system this pm and cannot double-triple- check that, but am very close to sure, and if I was wrong I'll post a retraction/correction about it later, when I've had a chance to re-check it, if I am not banned from the List by then). I wouldn't have bothered the List if the solution was as simple as that. At most, I am guilty of guessing incorrectly that the shell (BASH) variables would come from the same place -- somewhere in the guts of Cygwin1.dll -- that uname gets those data. That kind of guessing isn't *lazy* and it isn't flameworthy; it's an honest try at moving towards the solution for the problem. Why I would be expected to guess that you'd think it not worthwhile to have bash check this in the manner you describe is totally unpredictable by anyone with normal knowledge of things Cygwin. Your notions of what's "normal" knowledge of Cygwin are clearly completely out of touch with average expectations, of course. Frankly, to be OT for a moment, I am far beyond caring what you find annoying, Chris -- although last I had read from you about msys I saw no hint that you found Earnie's project particularly objectionable -- and that lack of caring goes (double) for Larry Hall too. Chris, you are the most out-of-control egomaniac I think I have ever come across on semi- and professional fora such as this; your surly objections to things people post and your irate condemnations for having the temerity to ask, have completely departed from the bounds of reason. I deliberately ignore threads like the recent ad-hominum against you (last week+) because I consider my time too valuable to me to waste on such stuff, but I find myself now draw irresistibly to whole- heartedly issue a long-deserved F U C K Y O U. and invite you to consequently ban me from "your" List. You recently moaned that people create How-To info pertaining to cygwin (the context was some tips on setting up ssh on cygwin or related to that), on external sites, rather than contributing to the material kept at redhat.com/cygwin. Take a look in the MIRROR next time you are moved to wonder about that. Your extreme personality disorder is enough to make any but the most hardy, abuse-insensitive soul decide to have as little to do with "Cygwin Officialdom" as possible. With Apologies to (most) other readers, Soren Andersen -------------------------- > >From: perlspinr AT att DOT net > >To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com > >Subject: A small question on machine id > >Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 19:13:20 +0000 > > > >The formal architecture triplet like: > >cpu-company-os(-kernel) > > > >on my Pentium machine gives > >MACHTYPE=i686-pc-cygwin > >and it's the same in Earnie's current Msys cygwin DLL - > >based system as in Cygwin proper. > > > >I am wondering why? > > > >Obviously one would expect the shell variable value to be > >"i586-pc-(cygwin|msys)"? -- 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/