On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 02:42:40PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 10:12:17AM -0700, Joachim Achtzehnter wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:03:43PM -0700, Joachim Achtzehnter wrote:
>>>>There was also some difference in newline handling which required
>>>>another set of sed changes, arghh!
>>>
>>>Well with detailed bug reports like this and the previous "make
>>>provides an error on one of my complex makefiles" we're surely well on
>>>the road towards perfection.
>>
>>This sarcastic response to one sentence out of a much longer post
>>quoted in isolation suggests that a clarification is in order. Neither
>>of my previous posts, not the one about the "threadlist_ix -1" error
>>and not the one I wrote specifically in response to a claim that the
>>recent changes to make were "not an inconvenience", were written with
>>any expectations for a fix.
>
>Well, you *could* expect a fix if you provided enough details.
>
>It is pretty frustrating to see content-free bug reports like "there was
>also some difference in newline handling" or "My big/complicated
>makefile SEGVs". Whether you intended these as bug reports or not, they
>are still reports of problems and no package maintainer wants to see
>reported problems sent to thousand of people whether they were just
s
>intended to blow off steam or not.
cgf
--
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/
