This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: .exe.stackdump and core dump files questions
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 05:53:28PM -0000, Dave Korn wrote:I feel so much the same when it comes to network support. It is only in
the light of continuously being barraged with insufficiently detailed
problems have I realized that problem-reporting should at least include
some observable fact as to what caused the problem. For example, (and
the cygwin mailing list has definitely more than these):
On 24 November 2006 13:25, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
[thread properly TITTTL'd for reasons of bock-bock-bock-baaaagaaaaaawk!]
It really is NOT funny: it's perfectly clear what Angelo was asking
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 22:43:45 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen
On Nov 23 22:07, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:There's nothing funny here. The stackdump file is human-readable
Yes. It's called "cat".Do you think to be fun? or that a sequence of HEX characters are
and there's no more information. If you want more information
you need a debugger and executables built with debugging information.
for, even though English is evidently not his first language. Instead
of helping him, like the other 2 respondents did, Chris decided to
mock him in public -- a terribly unfriendly and unprofessional thing
to do, which doesn't add any respect to this forum.
Just because it isn't very funny doesn't mean it was mocking. Or even that
it was /meant/ to be mocking, since intent and consequences are not always one
and the same.
It's facetious to attempt to infer someone's state of mind and
motivation from a single line of text with only four words in it, many
would consider that far too small a sample to be statistically valid.
But, hey, I *am* pretty facetious, so I'm going to try![*]
My *guess* (because 'guess' is all that any of us have been doing so
far) is that cgf saw the post, saw that it had already been answered
with all the relevant information, and didn't see why not to post a
"ha-ha-only-serious" type of quickfire humorous comeback. Which fell
flat on its face, but it's a long reach from there to "mocking".
This is fairly close to what happened except for the fact that 1) the
term "human readable" doesn't mean "I don't understand the output"
(otherwise I could claim that Hebrew wasn't human-readable) and 2) I
tend to approach technical support issues with few expectations of the
ability of the person asking the question and often reply exactly to
what the person asked*. Part of the reason that I do that is to get the
person thinking about expressing themselves more clearly and part is
because, over the years, I've grown to find the "I'm going to ask a
question and I want you to assume a bunch of stuff which may or may not
be true" style of bug report to be exasperating
"I can't ping. I hope you can fix this."
"I can't receive mail and since I recently upgraded to Thunderbird. Is
Thunderbird compatible with our mail server?"
I am now starting to believe the fact that stupidity does not lie on the
question but in the asker.
Astra Philippines Inc.
UP-Ayala Technopark, Diliman 1101, Quezon City
Member of the Astra Group of Companies
5-3-11 Sekido, Tama City
Tokyo 206-0011, Japan