From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23942 invoked by alias); 31 May 2005 04:29:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: Talk Amongst Yourselves Received: (qmail 23900 invoked by uid 22791); 31 May 2005 04:29:03 -0000 Received: from c-66-30-17-189.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 May 2005 04:29:03 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 3D4DF13CA7E; Tue, 31 May 2005 00:29:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 04:31:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Talk Amongst Yourselves Subject: Re: Serious performance problems (malloc related?) Message-ID: <20050531042900.GD20075@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: Talk Amongst Yourselves References: <20050531034844.46A4713C9D9@cgf.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050531034844.46A4713C9D9@cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00288.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 10:48:30PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: >And as long as I'm here and this is the correct venue for such ponderings >(at least according to Chris today), and on multiple other occasions... ...and at least once by Corinna... >one has to wonder out loud: Why does Chris purporedly not care what >people think of him, yet go to such great lengths to rationalize his >behavior to those very same people? And then apologize for it in yet >other posts? My apology in the cygwin list came after my response to Ed, when I subsequently realized that FlightGear was not a commercial entity asking for free technical support -- as I had been implying. I'm sorry that my meandering email somehow gave you the idea that not caring what some people thought about my email style would equate to never offering an apology when I think I've done something wrong. That is not the case. I don't think I have been sending many meandering rationalizations about my behavior but, thanks for the heads up. I'd already made a vow to myself not to do that again any time soon but your observation has reinforced my resolve. That is not to say that I won't defend myself if the need arises but I'll try to forego any further meandering explications of my personal philosophy even if they do seem to be de rigueur for free software project leads these days. Hmm. Maybe I need a blog. cgf