X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org From: "Dave Korn" To: Subject: RE: How Can I Use the FtpCommand Function with Cygwin? Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:09:52 -0000 Message-ID: <01d801c6319a$3bd55880$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 On 14 February 2006 18:44, Tischler, Ron wrote: NUMBER ONE THING TO DO BEFORE YOU POST TO THIS LIST AGAIN: READ http://cygwin.com/acronyms#PCYMTNQREAIYR. > These makefiles are large, and they came to us from another company, and > there are good business reasons to avoid changing them. Saying that the > makefiles are going about everything the wrong way is not an option. It's not the makefiles "going about everything the wrong way", it's YOU. Yes, the makefiles are good. They take a bunch of source, and build it with MSVC, and link it against the MSVC import libs, and all is good. Now you've taken the makefiles, kept them the same, taken the sources, kept them the same, but you've changed the compiler to gcc. WHY do you refuse to use the new import libs that go with the new compiler you've changed to using? cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today.... -- 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/