Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 13:41:42 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT edu DOT ar>
cc: Molnar Laszlo <molnarl AT cdata DOT tvnet DOT hu>,
        DJGPP workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>,
        robert DOT hoehne AT mathematik DOT tu-chemnitz DOT de
Subject: Re: perl for djgpp
In-Reply-To: <m0ww5Aj-000S1dC@inti.edu.ar>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970807134108.8454C-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote:

> What about creating a directory in the distribution to put these no
> so common zip files. In this way a person that doesn't know much
> won't download un-needed stuff.

IMHO, this will make the risk of people downloading partial packages
even higher.

Let me reiterate: I think splitting a package is only justifiable if
some parts of it are used MUCH MORE rarely than others (read: almost
never) and are significant in size.  In all other cases, I generally
vote for a single archive.
e access put the prototype of `gettimeofday' in <sys/time.h>.
So, for portability, users should include that header, and the docs
should say so.

> + @node sigaction, process
> + @subheading Syntax

The documentation for his and the other sigXXX functions was already
submitted to DJ a few months ago.  It was a complete documentation,
not a skeleton like here.  So these changes are also redundant.