This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: [1.7] su (goldstar)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:36:35 -0500
- Subject: Re: [1.7] su (goldstar)
- References: <op.u3nunr1t5o90vo@orion> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20091119215258.GB14033@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <email@example.com> <20091120004015.GA14403@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20091120141955.GC18289@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
- Reply-to: cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com
- Reply-to: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 09:19:55AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 05:54:50PM -0700, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>On 11/19/2009 05:40 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 03:26:53PM -0700, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>>Sometimes no is exactly the right answer.
>>>It's a fun way of answering a Yes/No question and I've done it
>>>countless times myself. The recipient of the "No" *usually* finds more
>>>explanation and, more importantly, alternate ways of doing things more
>>*Emphasis above (and below) mine*
>>Ergo *sometimes* no is exactly the right answer. This is exactly what
>>I said. Glad you agree with me.
>Redirected to cygwin-talk.
>Please don't continue the discussion here.
Well, that's confusing. I obviously was a little too zealous in my
changing of cygwin's to cygwin-talk's.
Probably just as well. It was a predictably stupid discussion anyway.