On Sun, 17 Aug 2003, Robert Collins wrote: > On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 02:41, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > 'Nuff said. > > I don't think we need this. > > The log file is -not- readable without knowledge of setup. Any > assumption folk draw from it need 'expert' review anyway. > > In short, this change is for folk that shouldn't be reading the log > anyway. > > Rob
Rob, I didn't think we needed this either, but there were a few people who did read the logs (without much more knowledge of setup). Frankly, some of the setup-related questions on the list result in a request to post the log, and apparently some people do peek into them (after searching the archives - whoohoo, somebody *is* doing it!). An example is <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-08/msg00761.html>. So I decided that since we do write a reasonably verbose message to the log, we should clarify it. Otherwise, let's make it cryptic enough not to arouse people's suspicitions. Does the above make sense? Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton
