Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 10:38:08 +0100 Message-ID: <687-Thu05Apr2001103808+0100-starksb@ebi.ac.uk> X-Mailer: emacs 20.7.1 (via feedmail 9-beta-7 I); VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.7.1 From: David Starks-Browning MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cygwin-apps FAQ [WAS: Re: for interest: cygwin rpm on sourceforge] In-Reply-To: <3ACB3C89.14063.2B3EFA@localhost> References: <3ACB7A00 DOT 969D0FE2 AT yahoo DOT com> <3ACB3C89 DOT 14063 DOT 2B3EFA AT localhost> On Wednesday 4 Apr 01, Paul Garceau writes: > Hmmm... > > On 4 Apr 2001, at 14:46, the Illustrious Earnie Boyd wrote: > > > So why tsk me? Chris asked the question. Obviously the answer is yes, > > we need a cygwin-apps FAQ-O-MATIC. > > > > Earnie. > > Perhaps he doesn't know what a faq-o-matic is...? > > At any rate, an example can be found at the gcc main website > (www.gnu.org/gcc?). In the thread associated with the message that Robert cited, I point out that the GCC F-O-M is a very poor example of how F-O-M should be used! That said, I think a Cygwin F-O-M would be a great idea, if done properly, and I would be willing to convert the existing "user" FAQ into F-O-M, but I think it would be a lot of work and I don't know where the time would come from. Cheers, David