X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 09:11:35 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Snapshot heads up for 20060301 2310 version Message-ID: <20060302141135.GA2781@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20060302095640 DOT GD3184 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060302095640.GD3184@calimero.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 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 Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:56:40AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >(*) It would be nice if you could try to shorten an strace in a meaningful > way next time. Hundreds of lines with > "--- Process 2480, exception C0000005 at 00000000 > don't really add any useful information and just fill up people's > mailboxes. Thanks. Sorry, Corinna, I have to disagree with you here. The cygcheck output was adequate to debug the problem in this case. Personally, I would rather that people forego sending unsolicited strace output entirely rather than either just blithely sending a large attachment or, IMO, worse, thinking that they understand the output and snipping the out the "irrelevant" parts. i.e., if no one has asked you for an strace, then don't send it. YMMV but I think that policy cuts down on mailing list bandwidth. 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/