Re: {FAQ, UG} alert? rebase

2004-02-23 Thread Larry Hall
At 09:26 AM 2/23/2004, Thomas L Roche you wrote: >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 bre

Re: {FAQ, UG} alert? rebase

2004-02-23 Thread Thomas L Roche
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/msg0

Re: {FAQ, UG} alert? rebase

2004-02-22 Thread Larry Hall
At 09:38 PM 2/22/2004, Thomas L Roche you 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/msg0110

{FAQ, UG} alert? rebase

2004-02-22 Thread Thomas L Roche
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