From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26546 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2003 22:49:53 -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 26537 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2003 22:49:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO main.gmane.org) (80.91.224.249) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Sep 2003 22:49:52 -0000 Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19uJyk-0007je-00 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:50:26 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: from sea.gmane.org ([80.91.224.252]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19uJyi-0007jW-00 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:50:24 +0200 Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19uJyA-00058j-00 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:49:50 +0200 From: Andrew DeFaria Subject: Re: basename(), dirname(), what happened? Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <181672454899.20030826123033@familiehaase.de> <20030829100633.GH614@emcb.co.uk> <126165476933.20030829122848@familiehaase.de> <20030829112004.GO614@emcb.co.uk> <20030901091036.GA22657@linux_rln.harvest> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh In-Reply-To: X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00163.txt.bz2 Shankar Unni wrote: > Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > >> ("At least there's a big company behind it that has the (legal) >> responsability for the quality of the program..") > > ROTFLMAO. > > What legal responsibility? I hope you have pointed these fine folks to > the appropriate sections of the so-called "License Agreements" (i.e. > "we agree that you will accept these terms, or you won't use the > program"), which specifically shirks all responsibility for any and > all mayhem caused by the program.. They may not have the responsibility of the mayhem that is caused but I think they can still be held responsible for basic product liability like "works as advertised". IOW the consumer should be able to expect that a tire will "work" on his car. Now we all know that some tires will fail due to problems and generally tire companies will replace the tire however they are not responsible for the mayhem that may have resulted (unless some smart lawyer can prove negligence). -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/