X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=AApfFFyqmEKxhBx6GNS5tC+vSJ4dBg5qXHyyIpR1vbGjND5vAkhHX
	aR7olIdkpTzHYlceCHv5T8PhwSD31Djuw1ubV/0N9anF2ZImf5VRXbJ3k6OfRUS6
	8UjQOKg69BVJS+KU8YsbByfcT05qEupmsPQyNHZAoWBX+BbiVlitmU=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	 bh=74U40VXCf3WHV4LajnWwQuromxc=; b=Tqiht7X6ov2MGNaVXLXwIDe8PXO4
	hZIXCZfKtpbCTo6NbFdUSzjKOGycjj2N9xJ3ga1O8LDgx/BAO2nquB7M+yTGT/I+
	mEGBdsaTG8FyEdo5biRjXrNkTcvhSsvUcMTInjOZi0rbD9mrgMjwpm9uHixAFfbk
	LxOuI1TmezubS3o=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RDNS_NONE,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org
X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1+zFMhXQO/X0hhq3A9MydBR
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:12:39 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Is package-grep.cgi's desig architecture biased?
Message-ID: <20131119161239.GA8112@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <CAC2zJ1te9zA2uGcUJM0c57X9ivr9t523-n7YgK52X7VCbB-L8g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <528B4A44 DOT 90104 AT gmail DOT com> <CAC2zJ1vEXQ2i4-1CkGiHSpU4oC=tvmwbnQsMuBNRsJ+DdogvAA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAC2zJ1vEXQ2i4-1CkGiHSpU4oC=tvmwbnQsMuBNRsJ+DdogvAA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 02:27:48PM +0200, Sophoklis Goumas wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:23 PM, marco atzeri <marco DOT atzeri AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
>> the two reports are separated
>>
>> http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-grep.cgi?grep=cygutils-extra&arch=x86_64
>>
>
>I know and hence this discussion.
>
>But should omitting the arch criteria, tha being the '&arch=x86_64'
>part of the the URI return ALL the relevant results?

No.

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple