On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:57:48AM +0100, Vaclav Haisman wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > > 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! > > [X] 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? > > > Offensive fortunes should probably be accessible only through -o optiona but > they definitely _must_ stay there. I would not even bother encoding them with > rot13.
No choice but to. -o files are expected to be rot13-encoded by the program. -- 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/
