This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Mysterious gdb behavior - cygcheck example
- From: Michael Schaap <cygwin at mscha dot org>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 13:51:59 +0200
- Subject: Re: Mysterious gdb behavior - cygcheck example
- References: <3D4B34C5.32022.71607DE5@localhost>
On 3-8-2002 7:41, Paul Derbyshire wrote:
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.
Have you *tried* it? Do a search for VNC on google. Guess what the
first hit is...
Looks like you're underestimating Google. (Either that, or there's
something wrong with your ability to identify relevant hits. Or,
perhaps even more likely, you like complaining about problems better
than solving them.)
- Michael
--
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/