Re: Mysterious gdb behavior - cygcheck example

["Paul Derbyshire" <derbyshire at globalserve dot net>]

On 3 Aug 2002 at 0:03, Dockeen wrote:

> OK, lets suppose I hear about a command, say, cygcheck, and
> I want to know about it, do I have it, what it is etc.
> 
> I enter 
> 
> which cygcheck

If I had reason to think I already had it, of course I'd do likewise. 
Vaguely remembering seeing the filename in a directory listing; 
explicitly remembering installing it or using it; etc.

> Cool, I have it. So what is it?  Well, in this case, I lucked
> out, as entering
> 
> man cygcheck

Well, once you have it and know you do the rest is really fairly 
clear.

> Well, going to the Cygwin home page, where there is a link to
> "Setup Package Search".

Is there? I never knew that. Now if someone tells me about some 
binary and I don't think I have it nor do I know what package it's in 
but I do know it's in some cygwin package I can find it without 
asking. Cool.

 > With respect to search engines, I used to joke that the most
> useful skill I picked up on my way to my BA was the ability
> to use an index.  On my way through grad school, that turned
> into a keyword search capability.  Now, it's search engines.
> I use Google most every day, to find out anything from whats
> wrong with some Python or C++ code, to free radical chemistry,
> to what companies might be in the market for Ph.D. physicists.
> If I have a problem with Cygwin, I go there, because it will
> find (with the help of the browser search) FAQ data, archive
> data, and mostly, the answer.

I use Google all the time. When I feel able to formulate a query that 
doesn't seem likely to either fail entirely or swamp me with 
irrelevant hits. Unusual long acronyms or words work best. Long 
phrases are poor, usually returning no hits, and short words or 
acronyms tend to return too many irrelevant hits. Combinations of 
words ... well, it depends on the combination. If the combination is 
oddball enough there may be a relevant hit in the first page or three 
of hits.

Of course I must also feel confident I'll be able to identify a 
relevant hit among irrelevant ones.

Some loser in some newsgroup recently flamed me for asking what VNC 
was in response to someone mentioning it -- whatever it was. They 
suggested I should use google. Pointless in this case: a million 
different things are probably known by that same acronym; one so 
short has to have been reused multiple times. And I wouldn't even be 
able to tell which of various VNCs was the one they were talking 
about. Mind you the context was computers, so Vancouver's airport 
call sign could be fairly judged irrelevant, but even the computer 
related VNCs must number in the dozens...

Search engines can't work magic. Expecting me to find anything in 
five minutes with Google is expecting Google to be the Oracle of 
Delphi. It just won't happen.

> Finally, on a lighter heavy note, on my work laptop, I have gcc
> from: djgpp, GNAT and Dev-C++, as well as 3 versions of gcc
> in Cygwin - base, 3.1 and 3.1.1 - need to get rid of the 3.1
> version.  The only contention problem I have run into involved
> GNAT and Cygwin (solved) and GNAT and djgpp (semi-kluged).

It's helpful that Cygwin's shell has added, Cygwin-specific path 
entries that Winblows doesn't see. Then I use the right gcc by using 
the right shell, command.com for djgpp's and bash for Cygwin's. I can 
see how it might get hairier with more of them, especially if there 
aren't partitioned environments for them all. One way, of course, is 
to make various pif files for DOS boxes with various added /bin 
directories on the PATH, and use the right command prompt shortcut 
for the right stuff -- one labeled GNAT with GNAT's binaries 
directory added on the PATH, another labeled djgpp, etc...



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/