FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Dave Korn]

On 16 August 2006 00:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 05:53:17PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote:
>> John W. Eaton wrote:
>>> On 15-Aug-2006, Joachim Achtzehnter wrote:
>>>> Clearly, developers make a huge contribution,
>>>> nobody is denying this, but to suggest that *only* developers contribute
>>>> and everybody else should therefore just shut up
>>> 
>>> I never said everyone else should "just shut up".  My point was that
>>> if you aren't contributing in some way, then you shouldn't expect your
>>> complaining to carry much weight.  The way to get things done is to do
>>> the work, not just complain and hope that people do something for you.
>> 
>> ...or offer money. That carries more weight than complaining. :-)
>> 
>> However that doesn't work in all cases. This I am reasonably confident
>> is one of them. But as a general rule...
> 
> No, it would work in this case, but I hesitate to name my price since
> it will surely make me sound even more evil.
> 
> cgf


  And that would be a bad thing because ....   ?

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:49:32AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 16 August 2006 00:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 05:53:17PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote:
>>>John W.  Eaton wrote:
>>>>On 15-Aug-2006, Joachim Achtzehnter wrote:
>>>>>Clearly, developers make a huge contribution, nobody is denying this,
>>>>>but to suggest that *only* developers contribute and everybody else
>>>>>should therefore just shut up
>>>>
>>>>I never said everyone else should "just shut up".  My point was that if
>>>>you aren't contributing in some way, then you shouldn't expect your
>>>>complaining to carry much weight.  The way to get things done is to do
>>>>the work, not just complain and hope that people do something for you.
>>>
>>>...or offer money.  That carries more weight than complaining.  :-)
>>>
>>>However that doesn't work in all cases.  This I am reasonably confident
>>>is one of them.  But as a general rule...
>>
>>No, it would work in this case, but I hesitate to name my price since
>>it will surely make me sound even more evil.
>
>And that would be a bad thing because ....  ?

I'm still getting used to being evil.  I have to take it one step at a
time.  I still have some small vestiges of humanity left and am not
quite ready to be viewed as diabolical yet.

cgf

Btw, it's $2000.

RE: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Charli Li]

-----Original Message-----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 11:05 AM
>To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List
>Subject: Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81
>
>
>On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:49:32AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>On 16 August 2006 00:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 05:53:17PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote:
>>>>John W.  Eaton wrote:
>>>>>On 15-Aug-2006, Joachim Achtzehnter wrote:
>>>>>>Clearly, developers make a huge contribution, nobody is denying this,
>>>>>>but to suggest that *only* developers contribute and everybody else
>>>>>>should therefore just shut up
>>>>>
>>>>>I never said everyone else should "just shut up".  My point was that if
>>>>>you aren't contributing in some way, then you shouldn't expect your
>>>>>complaining to carry much weight.  The way to get things done is to do
>>>>>the work, not just complain and hope that people do something for you.
>>>>
>>>>...or offer money.  That carries more weight than complaining.  :-)
>>>>
>>>>However that doesn't work in all cases.  This I am reasonably confident
>>>>is one of them.  But as a general rule...
>>>
>>>No, it would work in this case, but I hesitate to name my price since
>>>it will surely make me sound even more evil.
>>
>>And that would be a bad thing because ....  ?
>
>I'm still getting used to being evil.  I have to take it one step at a
>time.  I still have some small vestiges of humanity left and am not
>quite ready to be viewed as diabolical yet.
>
>cgf
>
>Btw, it's $2000.
>

So what?  The hippos do it all the time...
...even on the Hippo Network!

Say what?  Oh, so the hippos made cgf evil!  Gotcha...

Charli

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Igor Peshansky]

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> Btw:
> http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/boxer.htm

Indeed.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[One Angry User]

On a calm Thursday, the 17th day of August, 2006, Christopher Faylor's computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:

> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:01:01PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> >On 17 August 2006 16:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> >>> On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>>>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for
> >>>>> this. Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would behoove
> >>>>> you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was populated by
> >>>>> people who are familiar with it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Because I do not agree with your suggestion.
> >>>
> >>>  *sip*
> >>>
> >>>>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.
> >>>
> >>>  *sip*
> >>>
> >>>> So, here is my reason for the post again.
> >>>
> >>>  *sip*
> >>>
> >>>> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
> >>>> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.
> >>>
> >>> AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG
> >>> GLUG GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
> >>> intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away from
> >>> me.....
> >>
> >> Me not know what you mean Dave Korn.  Me think you...
> >>
> >> Hmm.  Me lost train of thought.
> >>
> >> Puppies!
> >>
> >> cfg
> >
> >
> >  Oh look!  <points>  An elephant!!!!
> >
> >
> >  <squelch>
> >
> >  Oops.  Poor puppy.   <snifl>
>
> Now me sad.
>
> > <looks around>
> >
> >     oooOOOOOooooOOOO!  Shiny things!
> >
> >   <happy again>
>
> Me not see shiny thing.  Me play with make instead.
>
> Colons not work.
>
> Now me very very sad.

Oh, he who makes -- make my make make sense!

OAU

RE: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Dave Korn]

On 17 August 2006 17:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:01:01PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 17 August 2006 16:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>> On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>>>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for
>>>>>> this. Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would
>>>>>> behoove you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was
>>>>>> populated by people who are familiar with it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Because I do not agree with your suggestion.
>>>> 
>>>>  *sip*
>>>> 
>>>>>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.
>>>> 
>>>>  *sip*
>>>> 
>>>>> So, here is my reason for the post again.
>>>> 
>>>>  *sip*
>>>> 
>>>>> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
>>>>> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.
>>>> 
>>>> AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG
>>>> GLUG GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
>>>> intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away
>>>> from me.....
>>> 
>>> Me not know what you mean Dave Korn.  Me think you...
>>> 
>>> Hmm.  Me lost train of thought.
>>> 
>>> Puppies!
>>> 
>>> cfg
>> 
>> 
>>  Oh look!  <points>  An elephant!!!!
>> 
>> 
>>  <squelch>
>> 
>>  Oops.  Poor puppy.   <snifl>
> 
> Now me sad.
> 
>> <looks around>
>> 
>>     oooOOOOOooooOOOO!  Shiny things!
>> 
>>   <happy again>
> 
> Me not see shiny thing.  Me play with make instead.
> 
> Colons not work.
> 
> Now me very very sad.
> 
> cgf


  Colons???   Colons not work!?!?!?!


<brrrraaaaaaaa-aaaaaa-aaaapppp!>


  *ME* colon work fine!  Now open window or we all be very very VERY sad!

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:01:01PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 17 August 2006 16:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:
>>> 
>>>> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for
>>>>> this. Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would behoove
>>>>> you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was populated by
>>>>> people who are familiar with it.
>>>> 
>>>> Because I do not agree with your suggestion.
>>> 
>>>  *sip*
>>> 
>>>>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.
>>> 
>>>  *sip*
>>> 
>>>> So, here is my reason for the post again.
>>> 
>>>  *sip*
>>> 
>>>> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
>>>> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.
>>> 
>>> AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG 
>>> GLUG GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
>>> intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away from
>>> me.....
>> 
>> Me not know what you mean Dave Korn.  Me think you...
>> 
>> Hmm.  Me lost train of thought.
>> 
>> Puppies!
>> 
>> cfg
>
>
>  Oh look!  <points>  An elephant!!!!
>
>
>  <squelch>
>
>  Oops.  Poor puppy.   <snifl>

Now me sad.

> <looks around>  
>
>     oooOOOOOooooOOOO!  Shiny things!
>
>   <happy again>

Me not see shiny thing.  Me play with make instead.

Colons not work.

Now me very very sad.

cgf

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[One Angry User]

On a calm Thursday, the 17th day of August, 2006, Christopher Faylor's computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:

> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> >On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:
> >
> >> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for this.
> >>> Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
> >>>
> >>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would behoove
> >>> you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was populated by people
> >>> who are familiar with it.
> >>
> >> Because I do not agree with your suggestion.
> >
> >  *sip*
> >
> >>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.
> >
> >  *sip*
> >
> >> So, here is my reason for the post again.
> >
> >  *sip*
> >
> >> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
> >> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.
> >
> >AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG  GLUG
> >GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE
> >
> >
> >  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
> >intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away from
> >me.....
>
> Me not know what you mean Dave Korn.  Me think you...
>
> Hmm.  Me lost train of thought.

Me thought a train wreck.

> Puppies!

GULP.  Lookee, more puppies!

OAU

RE: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Dave Korn]

On 17 August 2006 16:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:
>> 
>>> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for
>>>> this. Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
>>>> 
>>>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would behoove
>>>> you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was populated by
>>>> people who are familiar with it.
>>> 
>>> Because I do not agree with your suggestion.
>> 
>>  *sip*
>> 
>>>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.
>> 
>>  *sip*
>> 
>>> So, here is my reason for the post again.
>> 
>>  *sip*
>> 
>>> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
>>> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.
>> 
>> AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG 
>> GLUG GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE
>> 
>> 
>>  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
>> intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away from
>> me.....
> 
> Me not know what you mean Dave Korn.  Me think you...
> 
> Hmm.  Me lost train of thought.
> 
> Puppies!
> 
> cfg


  Oh look!  <points>  An elephant!!!!


  <squelch>

  Oops.  Poor puppy.   <snifl>


 <looks around>  

     oooOOOOOooooOOOO!  Shiny things!

   <happy again>


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Christopher Faylor]

Btw:

http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/boxer.htm

cgf

Re: FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:
>
>> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for this.
>>> Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
>>> 
>>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would behoove
>>> you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was populated by people
>>> who are familiar with it.
>> 
>> Because I do not agree with your suggestion. 
>
>  *sip*  
>
>>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.  
>
>  *sip* 
>
>> So, here is my reason for the post again.
>
>  *sip*  
>
>> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
>> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.
>
>AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG  GLUG
>GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE
>
>
>  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
>intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away from
>me.....

Me not know what you mean Dave Korn.  Me think you...

Hmm.  Me lost train of thought.

Puppies!

cfg

FW: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81

[Dave Korn]

On 17 August 2006 16:01, William A. Hoffman wrote:

> At 10:49 AM 8/17/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I've already mentioned once that this was the wrong mailing list for this.
>> Why do you seem to need everything repeated at you?
>> 
>> If you, or anyone, is having problems with MinGW's make it would behoove
>> you to discuss the problems in a mailing list which was populated by people
>> who are familiar with it.
> 
> Because I do not agree with your suggestion. 

  *sip*  

>  Apparently you need things repeated to you.  

  *sip* 

> So, here is my reason for the post again.

  *sip*  

> You mentioned MinGW as an alternative, it does not work.
> Also, someone on this list asked me a question, and I answered it.

AAAAAARRRRRRRRHRRHRGGGHHHHH   <smashes neck entirely off bottle>  GLUG  GLUG
GLUG  GLUG    GLUG  GLUUURRRRGLE


  The stupidity levels emanating from this guy's posts are sucking all the
intelligence out of my brain, I swear, I can feel it all slipping away from
me.....


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....