From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8809 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2012 19:13:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 8791 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2012 19:13:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,TW_CG X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org (HELO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org) (204.13.248.71) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:13:38 +0000 Received: from pool-173-76-50-112.bstnma.fios.verizon.net ([173.76.50.112] helo=cgf.cx) by mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rmrzt-0000Oo-Vw for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:13:38 +0000 Received: from localhost (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 436B713C022 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:13:37 -0500 (EST) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX19rESNyzCzA4e9CLNif+iiK Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:13:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Subject: Re: "Bad address" error with redirection (stdout and stderr) in background process Message-ID: <20120116191337.GB23201@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com References: <6811C728662A4A2180D060AA7D9E9200@gigabyte> <4F11DBDF.7080300@gmail.com> <4F1436D2.20702@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F1436D2.20702@gmail.com> 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: 2012-q1/txt/msg00001.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 02:40:18PM +0000, Dave Korn wrote: >On 16/01/2012 06:47, Heiko Elger wrote: >> Dave Korn gmail.com> writes: >> >>> looks like there was a second snapshot later the same day that replaced the >>> one you had installed. >> >> That's it! Thanks a lot .. >> I never see a snapshot released twice a day .... >> >> Just one question: >> How can I figure out whether a snapshot is released more than once a day? > > Well, if ... > >- you download a snapshot >- you find a bug >- you report it and discuss it on the list >- cgf says he's just created a snapshot to fix your bug > >... you can infer by pure logic alone that he's not talking about the >snapshot that was uploaded *before* you reported your bug. Thank you Dave, for a good thirty seconds of LOL. cgf