X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:50:54 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81
Message-ID: <20060816155054.GY20467@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060815151104 DOT 0b40e260 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com> <01b901c6c116$21259430$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060816091525 DOT 0ab90af0 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com> <20060816144110 DOT GX20467 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060816111421 DOT 0b446b60 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060816111421.0b446b60@pop.nycap.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Aug 16 11:35, William A. Hoffman wrote:
> I assumed since cgf worked for Red hat, that his offer to take money
> would go to Red Hat.  My mistake.

Surprise, cgf doesn't work for Red Hat.  Only I do.

> >I'm honestly confused.  Why would it better to have another Cygwin
> >distro maintainer for a package instead of getting the patches included
> >upstream?  This makes no sense at all.  If my head wouldn't be fixed to
> >my neck, it would actually fall down from all the shaking now.
> 
> Because it would be easy.  A small patch and everything goes back
> to the way it was.   I also think this is a unique cygwin issue and
> the upstream maintainers may not be interested in it.  

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2006-07/msg00879.html

That doesn't actually sound like the make maintainer is not interested
in patches...


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
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/