This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-talk
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: Cygwin mentioned in "current directory" discussion
On Nov 16 11:11, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:29:24AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Nov 15 21:34, Andy Koppe wrote:
> >> On 15 November 2010 19:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> > On Nov ??9 23:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> >> https://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2010/11/09/10087919.aspx
> >> >
> >> > This morning I added a comment to the blog, #42 in the list:
> >> >[...]
> >> >
> >> > Two minutes ago, I found that my comment had been silently removed!
> >> > I'm not aware that my comment contained offensive, abusive, or
> >> > disrespectful language. I'm really wondering why Raymond decided
> >> > to remove my comment. This is quite disappointing.
> >>
> >> Perhaps it got swallowed by a COM server that can't deal with a
> >> disappeared working directory. ;)
> >
> >Or Raymond fears hippos.
>
> He also deleted my response to the guy who suggested that Windows does
> copy-on-write so we could modify NTDLL. And, now I can't seem to
> respond at all.
>
> Sure. We could just figure out where to modify NTDLL in all of the
> versions of NTDLL that have ever existed and then stand on our heads
> to modify the memory in place every time a Cygwin process is started.
>
> And, as Corinna says, this all flys in the face of Cygwin's philosophy.
>
> Meh.
And now he deleted my reply to f0dder as well, giving the reason
"Discussing undocumented APIs is a good way to get a comment deleted"
and he closed the blog entry for further commenting. Nice guy.
I don't quite understand the difference between my comments and the
other comments.
Apart from that I don't understand his weird replies about 0% and 100%
correctness. Well, I'm not interested in COM anyway. And if COM
changes the CWD it's broken by design. But I guess that's not allowed
to say, either...
Corinna