> Then show me the GitHub issue you filed that proves it. If you're talking about the Makefile configuration, I don't care. You already fixed it [1], which was

> Then show me the GitHub issue you filed that proves it. If you're talking about the Makefile configuration, I don't care. You already fixed it [1], which was good. I left that experience with a neutral feeling; it was good that you fixed it, but it was not good that such a common thing was not handled. I decided to keep a watch on Cosmopolitan with a bit of happy anticipation. (It was later seeing you on this site and lobste.rs that left a bad taste in my mouth.) You're right, though, that a Makefile won't be able to handle it, and that that's not Cosmopolitan's problem, though I would suggest a different build system. > Good. Please stop following me. Oh, I don't follow you. But I check this site and lobste.rs regularly, and I see you post. Since I believe that Cosmopolitan is the wrong direction for the industry to go, I express that opinion. Nothing wrong with that, especially since you do the opposite by so zealously marketing Cosmopolitan. And it's easy to notice one of your submissions; your domain is instantly recognizable, as is your username. Basically, Cosmopolitan may be radioactive to me, but that doesn't mean I won't express my opinion about it when I see a submission about it, and that does not mean I'm "following" you; it just means I'm an opportunist. If expressing my opinion of your software makes you unhappy, that's not my problem, it is yours. [1]: https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/issues/11 https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/issues/11