At 09:38 PM 2/22/2004, Thomas L Roche wrote: >> Given recent traffic concerning the goodness of rebase'ing, e.g.
>> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-02/msg01097.html >> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-02/msg00899.html >> (but occasional breakage, e.g. >> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-02/msg01100.html >> ) perhaps some treatment of the topic is FAQ- or UG-worthy? Larry Hall 02/22/2004 10:49:11 PM: > I think we can categorize the current problem as a bug. The zsh problem, yes > Given that this is likely a bug, it doesn't make much sense to > document it formally in the FAQ or UG. I wasn't proposing to document the zsh/rebase bug, but rather the * general goodness of rebase * specific use of rebase for problem solution (e.g. prior to full-scale debugging) and general "cygwin hygeine." -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
