At 11:58 PM 3/20/2002, Andrew DeFaria wrote: >Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote: > >>>Not really. All the below reference says is that this is intentional, not why it's >being done. My question was why. >>If you follow the later posts as I mention below, you might find the answers. > > >Don't have the time. > > >>If you're really interested in understanding what the background on this >>issue is, you'll want to check out the discussions in the email archives >>regarding the problems that arose when bash was changed. >>BTW, bash was changed because these environment variables are set at login >>on *NIX platforms, so setting them in bash is redundant at best. >>But I still recommend looking at the email archives to understand everyone's ideas >on this issue. > > >I really don't have the time to do this. I just pointed out the issue.
OK. I guess I was just pointing out that this issue has already been discussed. To my mind, it's not a problem awaiting a solution. It's merely awaiting someone interested enough to implement the proper solution. Larry Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office Holliston, MA 01746 (508) 893-9889 - FAX -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
