Christopher Faylor-8 wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 03:12:39AM -0700, Marc Girod wrote: >>marco atzeri-4 wrote: >>> My experience is that using the standard "problem report" improve the >>> chance to correctly identify the root cause and reduce the number of >>> guess that everyone could have. >>> >>One problem I have is that I use this list via the (old) nabble web site, >>and this one doesn't let me post attachments. >>Now, I had a different issue, from my other (home) laptop, and I tried >>to send a mail with the cygcheck.out as an attachment from my gmail >>account. I didn't get a reply of any kind (checked my spam folder) and >>I do not see the message appear here (sent Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 12:45 PM) > > If the message isn't in the list archives it didn't reach the list. > > cgf >
That means, you should check http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/ to see, if the message arrived to cygwin at cygwin dot com. Nothing that contains an email address in the body is accepted by the list, but I received an email with complaints in such situation. There is a problem with nabble, that it sometimes shows post with a delay o several days. This also implies nabble can claim your posts (through nabble) were not (yet) accepted by the list for several days, the delay is however not at cygwin list. I'm writing this because it can hold you from identifying the problem properly. To test the nabble attachments, I send a body of nabble delay mail. http://old.nabble.com/file/p32581457/nabble_delay.txt nabble_delay.txt -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION-tp32557806p32581457.html Sent from the Cygwin list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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
