X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <44E94C5E.60605@netacquire.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:02:06 -0700
From: Joachim Achtzehnter <joachima AT netacquire DOT com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060714)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81
References: <00f501c6c20f$29eddbf0$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM>
In-Reply-To: <00f501c6c20f$29eddbf0$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
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

Dave Korn wrote:

> > Because I do not agree with your suggestion.
>
>  You don't agree that this is the cygwin list, not the mingw list?

Some people are trying to solve an issue with cygwin's build of make by 
discussing possible solutions. Those who have nothing to contribute to 
this effort would do well to just ignore this thread instead of 
responding to every second posting with remarks like this. We know that 
you dislike DOS paths (and people who use DOS paths with cygwin too?), 
so there is no need to repeatly point this out. On the specific point 
above, it is rather disingenious if MingW make is proposed as a solution 
to somebody's problem and when it is then explained that this isn't the 
case the topic becomes inappropriate. It is also not nice, to say the 
least, to omit crucial detail from quoted text, such as this:

> > You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work. Also,
> > someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.

If MinGW is off-topic it is off-topic for everybody, not just those on 
one side of the argument.

Again, my main point: It is ok to ignore a thread you're not interested in.

Joachim


-- 
work:  joachima AT netacquire DOT com  (http://www.netacquire.com)
home:  joachim AT kraut DOT ca         (http://www.kraut.ca)


--
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/