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 Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 10:26:30 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Bug: link.exe Message-ID: <20050105152630.GB6991@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <41C9ED30 DOT 6000709 AT xilinx DOT com> <20041223093516 DOT GB317 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20050105100254 DOT GA5240 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050105100254.GA5240@cygbert.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 11:02:54AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >The bottom line is, you can complain, but the better solution is to >make your environment more foolproof against changes in one part of it. >In case of MSDEV tools I suggest to put the MSDEV tool path in front of >the Cygwin paths. It's what I'd do anyway. Hmm. I have to wonder how often sound, practical advice like the above is taken as "negative". Given that I've seen people claim to have been "flamed" here for including email addresses in the body of their messages, I think that some people set the bar a little low when interpreting email in a negative context. cgf -- 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/