FW: bash completion (was: RE: Units)

Ebrey, Carl Carl.Ebrey@uk.experian.com
Wed Dec 19 08:29:00 GMT 2001


I couldn't agree more.  I was merely trying to clarify what was being said.
I hoped that my post was clear enough to not imply that I was suggesting it
myself.

Carl

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 4:18 PM
To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: FW: bash completion (was: RE: Units)

<snip>

As Chuck has pointed out, we are clearly not going to approve a category
which is essentially a concatenation of two existing categories.  And, it
doesn't make sense to me to use this particular package for a departure
from current practices.

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



More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list