From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4720 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2009 00:43:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 4673 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jul 2009 00:43:51 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ew0-f205.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f205.google.com) (209.85.219.205) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:43:39 +0000 Received: by ewy1 with SMTP id 1so546937ewy.2 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.34.2 with SMTP id h2mr513168ebh.58.1247791416268; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.2.99? (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm893516eya.49.2009.07.16.17.43.35 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:43:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A5FCC40.2040608@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:43:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "The Vulger And Sarcastic And Contemptuous *And* Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk Maiming... oh, you know the routine" Subject: Re: MVFS results References: <20090715204831.GA27613@calimero.vinschen.de> <20090716090703.GH27613@calimero.vinschen.de> <20090716094505.GJ27613@calimero.vinschen.de> <4A5EFC69.10408@gmail.com> <4A5F0EDF.3050304@gmail.com> <20090717003204.GA29766@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20090717003204.GA29766@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2009-q3/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:28:31PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: >> Dave Korn wrote: >>> [nonsense] >> Bah, wrong list, sorry. > > It really is ok to be humorous in the Cygwin list. I know, but I wouldn't have bothered with a silly "To:" line if I had meant to send it there! > Or do I mean contemptuously sarcastic? Hmm. Come to think of it there > obviously is no difference. Say, is that commutative? I just wondered which would be worse: contemptuous sarcasm, or sarcastic contempt. Oh wait! I could be facetious too! cheers, DaveK