From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2327 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2010 21:10:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 2182 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Nov 2010 21:09:36 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-173-76-56-137.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (173.76.56.137) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.83/v0.83-20-g38e4449) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:09:32 +0000 Received: from ednor.cgf.cx (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D4A213C061 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:09:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 87EF02B352; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:09:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:10:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin mentioned in "current directory" discussion Message-ID: <20101116210930.GB22104@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com References: <20101110043738.GA19327@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20101115192609.GA22462@calimero.vinschen.de> <20101116082924.GA26851@calimero.vinschen.de> <20101116161100.GE4671@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20101116195202.GA1648@calimero.vinschen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101116195202.GA1648@calimero.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2010-q4/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 08:52:02PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Nov 16 11:11, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:29:24AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >On Nov 15 21:34, Andy Koppe wrote: >> >> On 15 November 2010 19:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >> > On Nov ??9 23:37, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> >> >> https://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2010/11/09/10087919.aspx >> >> > >> >> > This morning I added a comment to the blog, #42 in the list: >> >> >[...] >> >> > >> >> > Two minutes ago, I found that my comment had been silently removed! >> >> > I'm not aware that my comment contained offensive, abusive, or >> >> > disrespectful language. I'm really wondering why Raymond decided >> >> > to remove my comment. This is quite disappointing. >> >> >> >> Perhaps it got swallowed by a COM server that can't deal with a >> >> disappeared working directory. ;) >> > >> >Or Raymond fears hippos. >> >> He also deleted my response to the guy who suggested that Windows does >> copy-on-write so we could modify NTDLL. And, now I can't seem to >> respond at all. >> >> Sure. We could just figure out where to modify NTDLL in all of the >> versions of NTDLL that have ever existed and then stand on our heads >> to modify the memory in place every time a Cygwin process is started. >> >> And, as Corinna says, this all flys in the face of Cygwin's philosophy. >> >> Meh. > >And now he deleted my reply to f0dder as well, giving the reason >"Discussing undocumented APIs is a good way to get a comment deleted" >and he closed the blog entry for further commenting. Nice guy. >I don't quite understand the difference between my comments and the >other comments. > >Apart from that I don't understand his weird replies about 0% and 100% >correctness. Well, I'm not interested in COM anyway. And if COM >changes the CWD it's broken by design. But I guess that's not allowed >to say, either... I didn't get that either. But I wonder which gets more hits: this mailing list archive or his blog? cgf