From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4766 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2003 15:10:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 4743 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2003 15:10:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO darius.concentric.net) (207.155.198.79) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2003 15:10:00 -0000 Received: from mcfeely.concentric.net (mcfeely.concentric.net [207.155.198.83]) by darius.concentric.net [Concentric SMTP Routing 1.0] id h31F9vc02206 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:09:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from Clemens.cris.com (xo.285.238.66.in-addr.arpa [66.238.120.165] (may be forged)) by mcfeely.concentric.net (8.9.1a+patch) id KAA12300; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:09:56 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030401070325.029cedb0@pop3.cris.com> X-Sender: rrschulz@pop3.cris.com Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 15:10:00 -0000 To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: Randall R Schulz Subject: Re: ls Question + bug? In-Reply-To: References: <17x3k3weekv90.dlg@thorstenkampe.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00056.txt.bz2 Thorsten, At 06:42 2003-04-01, you wrote: >* Hannu E K Nevalainen (garbage mail) (03-04-01 11:30 +0100) > >> > > > IMO the sense of it is still there, even in NT. Can't tell about XP - but I > > would be surprised if the changes were that many. > >XP is the first rocksolid Windows OS. Hardly. NT 4 and 2000 have always been perfectly stable and reliable for me, running for days and weeks on end without trouble. They have additional (subjective) benefit of not having garish, cartoonish GUIs, though 2K shows some tendencies. Fortunately, most of the silly stuff can be turned off. Marginal drivers and flaky hardware are not Microsoft's fault, though MS may not make it easy to produce a good driver, I don't really know how hard it is. > > I've been running _well known_ applications on NT that misbehaved > every day. "Well known" does not imply "high quality." Nor does the presence of a malfunction in itself point specifically to application problems, OS problems, driver problems or hardware problems. >But they didn't normally crush the whole system. "Crush?" >Thorsten Randall Schulz -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/