Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <5DABF7424840D411BE9600508B6621F803794E7C@exchukthis02.experian.co.uk> From: "Ebrey, Carl" To: "'cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com'" Subject: RE: bash completion (was: RE: Units) Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:21:17 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain I have to admit that I thought it was quite confusing too. Perhaps if it said, "This rule also applies to Cygwin itself because Cygwin is also a package"? Just my 2p/c/whatever. Carl -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com] Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 4:13 PM To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: bash completion (was: RE: Units) I'm not sure how you got that impression. "This includes the cygwin package itself" would be applied to "If your package is dependent on a file". So, if your package is not dependent on anything in the cygwin package there is not reason to include the cygwin package. If the intent was to say "Always include the cygwin package" then it would have been a lot clearer to say that. I'd clarify this if I understood why this is confusing. cgf ======================================================================= Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed to any third party without our permission. There is no intention to create any legally binding contract or other commitment through the use of this email. Experian Limited (registration number 653331). Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF