bash completion (was: RE: Units)

[Ebrey, Carl]

I have to admit that I thought it was quite confusing too.  Perhaps if it
said, "This rule also applies to Cygwin itself because Cygwin is also a
package"?

Just my 2p/c/whatever.

Carl

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 4:13 PM
To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: bash completion (was: RE: Units)

<snip>

I'm not sure how you got that impression.  "This includes the cygwin package
itself" would be applied to "If your package is dependent on a file".  So,
if
your package is not dependent on anything in the cygwin package there is
not reason to include the cygwin package.

If the intent was to say "Always include the cygwin package" then it would
have been a lot clearer to say that.

I'd clarify this if I understood why this is confusing.

cgf


=======================================================================
Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may
not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed
to any third party without our permission.  There is no intention to
create any legally binding contract or other commitment through the use
of this email.

Experian Limited (registration number 653331).  
Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF