Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3D4BC3DF.2000208@mscha.org>
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 13:51:59 +0200
From: Michael Schaap <cygwin AT mscha DOT org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020721
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Mysterious gdb behavior - cygcheck example
References: <3D4B34C5 DOT 32022 DOT 71607DE5 AT localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: at mscha.org by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/)

On 3-8-2002 7:41, Paul Derbyshire wrote:

>I use Google all the time. When I feel able to formulate a query that 
>doesn't seem likely to either fail entirely or swamp me with 
>irrelevant hits. Unusual long acronyms or words work best. Long 
>phrases are poor, usually returning no hits, and short words or 
>acronyms tend to return too many irrelevant hits. Combinations of 
>words ... well, it depends on the combination. If the combination is 
>oddball enough there may be a relevant hit in the first page or three 
>of hits.
>
>Of course I must also feel confident I'll be able to identify a 
>relevant hit among irrelevant ones.
>
>Some loser in some newsgroup recently flamed me for asking what VNC 
>was in response to someone mentioning it -- whatever it was. They 
>suggested I should use google. Pointless in this case: a million 
>different things are probably known by that same acronym; one so 
>short has to have been reused multiple times. And I wouldn't even be 
>able to tell which of various VNCs was the one they were talking 
>about. Mind you the context was computers, so Vancouver's airport 
>call sign could be fairly judged irrelevant, but even the computer 
>related VNCs must number in the dozens.
>
Have you *tried* it?  Do a search for VNC on google.  Guess what the 
first hit is...
Looks like you're underestimating Google.  (Either that, or there's 
something wrong with your ability to identify relevant hits.  Or, 
perhaps even more likely, you like complaining about problems better 
than solving them.)

 - Michael


--
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/