RE: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

["Gary R. Van Sickle" <g.r.vansickle@worldnet.att.net>]

[TTTTLTLLLT'ing this to the proper list, unlike some Korns et al I could
mention]

> From: Joachim Achtzehnter
> 
> Dave Korn wrote:
> 
> > Every single day for the past month, we have had at least 
> > seventy-four[*] identical duplicate redundant reports of this...
> 
> Have you considered that there just might be a significant 
> message hidden in this from your user community? As somebody 
> who was involved in one of these earlier threads, let me also 
> mention that to every one of these seventy-four[*] reports 
> you see on the mailing list there is another user who 
> expresses his annoyance with these changes in private emails, 
> having given up on posting such things because of the hostile 
> reaction one gets these days for expressing views about 
> requirements that certain people here don't like.
> 

"These days"?  You're new 'round these parts, huh?

> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> > I just don't care about MS-DOS paths.
> 
> Fair enough, you've made that pretty clear in previous posts.
> 

It's kind of sad really: There used to be a time when Cygwin was more "POSIX
And Windows Living In Relative Harmony" than "Any flavor as long as it's
Linux".

> > If I am somehow conveying the impression that there is some 
> threshold 
> > of affected users which will cause me to spend my own time 
> trying to 
> > modify make, let me make it clear - that is not the case.
> 
> If this implies that Cygwin maintainers generally "just don't 
> care" about their users anymore perhaps those users will have 
> to band together some day and consider creating a Cygwin fork...
> 

Where do you think MinGW came from?

> Joachim
> 

-- 
Gary R. Van Sickle