Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 23:38:31 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Obscene content in cygwin file.
Message-ID: <20050106043831.GA7846@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <007b01c4f3a8$b49ba110$05010e0a AT 2mbit DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <007b01c4f3a8$b49ba110$05010e0a@2mbit.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 11:32:14PM -0500, Brian Bruns wrote:
>Remember, alot of these have been in the fortunes package for god
>knows how long, and Cygwin isn't the only one thats going to have
>them.  I'm betting that any distro that has the Fortunes package has
>them too.

Right.  The README of the package says this:

  The potentially offensive fortunes are installed by default on FreeBSD
  systems.  If you're absolutely, *positively*,
  without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt sure that your user community goes
  berzerk/sues your pants off/drops dead upon reading one of them, edit
  the Makefile in the subdirectory datfiles, and do "make all install".

So, we do undoubtedly have the default version and I am undoubtedly
getting more prudish about this type of thing.

Maybe we need a vote.  I would really like to know how people feel about
this.  We haven't had a vote in a long time so:

How do you feel about the off-color content in the cygwin fortune files?

  [ ] Offended.  Think about the children!
  [ ] Not offended.  Stop bothering me with your Puritanical values.
  [ ] Don't care.  Can we go back to talking about how negative this list is now?


cgf

--
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/