On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 02:21:51PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 10:59:55AM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > >On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 01:22:10PM -0700, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote: > >>On 9/16/05, Eric Blake wrote: > >>>According to Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) on 9/15/2005 10:48 AM: > >>>>The FAQ (http://www.cygwin.com/faq/faq_3.html) mentions using this > >>>>idiom for strace and cygcheck, but not for Tcl/Tk. Perhaps these > >>>>should be noted as well? > >>> > >>>Now that strace and cygcheck work in without having to explicitly mount > >>>them non-cygexec, the FAQ needs updating anyways. > >> > >>OK. Maybe I'll take a stab at creating a script to find exe's in /bin/ > >>not linked to cygwin1.dll and put that in the FAQ instead. > > > >There's a hardcoded limit to number of mount points, isn't there? > >Perhaps you should mention that in the FAQ too. > > I think this should be a change for the standard documentation now the > FAQ, primarily because this is the first time I can think of that this > question/observation has been made.
s/now/not/ ?? Do you mean the whole idea of -X-mounting /bin? Or the limit on mount points? If just the latter, the FAQ about the former should also mention the limit if it gives a recipe that potentially could create too many. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
