On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 12:12:51PM +0100, Tino Lange wrote: > The only point that is left is the cygcheck.out - did you mean that?
Yes. > OK - why didn't I include a "cygcheck.out"? > > a) maybe the information was already enough for you to locate the problem No. > b) "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is a huge list - I don't want to spam lots of > people with this information - if someone needs it I can send it to him > personally I don't like to recieve lot's of cygcheck.out a day as a > public reader of this list myself. It's one (better: the) purpose of the cygwin ML to send bug reports here and to receive help if somebody actually knows a solution. > c) cygcheck.out can contain *lots* of personal information. I don't want > Microsoft to spy on my computer why should I broadcast such information > by myself actively on a mailinglist that's very huge, get's archived and > so on????? Then obfuscate stuff in the cygcheck output which you take for private. > I have no Problem sending this file to you, Corinna, or some of your Perhaps, but *I* have problems with getting PM about Cygwin stuff. Did you read the section "Shouldn't I just send email to straight to a cygwin developer or package maintainer?", especially the "Reply-To:" passage? > You just got it with separate mail. No, I didn't so far and I don't want to get PM further on. This is the reason I'm setting the Reply-To: to the ML and not using my real mail address. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc. -- 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/
