From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27693 invoked by alias); 25 May 2006 19:00:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 27684 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2006 19:00:31 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:00:28 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FjL48-0000d8-8F for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:00:14 +0200 Received: from 65.207.213.226 ([65.207.213.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:00:12 +0200 Received: from mwoehlke by 65.207.213.226 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:00:12 +0200 To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com From: mwoehlke Subject: Re: slow share = slow scripts? Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <004b01c68020$2ca7a190$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <20060525175702.GO13907@ns1.anodized.com> <20060525181108.GF5946@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060420) In-Reply-To: <20060525181108.GF5946@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List X-SW-Source: 2006-q2/txt/msg00348.txt.bz2 TITTTLing... Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 10:57:03AM -0700, clayne wrote: >> On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 12:34:10PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote: >>> Here is what I am talking about: >>> ~$ mount h:/mwoehlke/src /usr/src >>> mount: defaulting to '--no-executable' flag for speed since native path >>> references a remote share. Use '-f' option to override. >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>> >>> ...neither 'mount --help' or 'man mount' makes *any* mention of this >>> additional functionality of the '-f' flag. See? I'm *not* imagining >>> things. :-) >> The guy was simply stating that he's human and headn't read it yet. He >> also pointed out that an implicit behavior was not explicitly >> documented as such, but more so infered by output when using the >> --no-executable flag. >> >> ' -f, --force force mount, don't warn about missing mount >> point directories ' >> >> To you guys saying 'get off the computer' [snip potentially offensive bits] >> Cut people some slack for once - they're on the same side as you trying to >> achieve the same goals. Right... We're only human. Sheesh. > The correct response to someone telling you to use "-f" is to read the > man page and, when you see that you've had a previous misconception > about "-f", nod to yourself and get on with your life. You don't have > to send email telling us all that you thought "-f" meant something else, > (especially when you hadn't previously exposed your misconception) and > you surely don't have to send *two* messages explaining your confusion > when there really is nothing to be confused about. I could send a long message about this, but upon further reflection, I won't. Instead, I will point out two things. First, I had *already* read the man page in response to Larry's post. Second, I replied to Dave Korn *before* I saw your post (not before I *read* it... it wasn't there when I wrote my reply to Dave). Think about it. Cygwin = MSFTEU. I'm *supposed* to be confused. ;-) According to the man page, 'mount -f' does X. From *real experience* I *know* that it, in fact, does Y. I think we have agreed that this is MSFTEU = confusing. Let's not argue about it. -- Matthew ...Ruthlessly beating Windows with a hammer until it looks like POSIX.