This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated cygwin Package: procmail-3.22-10

On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 07:21:07PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
>> It certainly is a correct and informative statement 
>...but utterly irrelevant since a) Cygwin isn't Red Hat Linux and b) this
>particular package of procmail is not the RHL one to which the statement

The main web page for cygwin mentions that it is supposed to be an
emulation of Linux.  I don't think it's an error to mention that
procmail is used on the most popular version of Linux, especially when
the company who produces the most popular version of Linux also sponsors

>Might as well say "The procmail program is used by Solaris 2.5 for all
>local mail delivery" in a cygwin packaging description....  [assuming
>that that version of solaris did in fact use procmail; otherwise you
>could substitute any other open source app that also exists in a cygwin
>version to make the same point.]

If Cygwin claimed to be emulating Solaris, then this would be a useful
datapoint.  Since it doesn't make that claim, I don't think your analogy
is very apt.

>>and it is one that
>> wouldn't be correct if you changed "Red Hat" to "Cygwin".
><koff> Isn't this a bit of a strawman argument?  I don't recall suggesting
>making such a change, so I'm not sure what relevance the possible validity
>or otherwise of such a change is to this topic....

When someone talks about cut/paste errors, usually there are two things
that are a problem.  One is that a word is used incorrectly, as when
people send announcements to cygwin-announce which are cut from a
previous announcement and neglect to replace a package name.  The other
is when something should not have been pasted at all and needs to be

I addressed both in my message.

>>So, IMHO, there's not anything wrong with it.
>Well YJM, we all knew that!

I don't exactly understand how my mild defense of Jason would be characterized
as "M" but, this discussion is really not even worth the electrons that its
displayed on, so I'll stop now.


Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]