> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 08:47:40AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: >> That may be (both are human constructs, it's like say "hey, that's made >> up >> word!", but no, I don't. My point is simply that while it is extremely >> silly code, it is in fact code provided by upstream. It's still >> maintained, is of a valid license, and I don't see a valid reason to >> break >> with upstream here. If you can convince upstream to split it out or >> drop >> it, great. > > That's simple, I'm upstream maintainer. The command has been disabled > by default in the last stable release. And yes, one I day I'll drop it... > >> If not, and there isn't a compelling disk space or security >> argument, I really don't see why this should be dropped. I'm looking >> for >> a clear example of demonstrable harm. It's 14k of silliness, not a >> rootkit. > > - it's joke rather than anything useful > - it's installed on all systems, but almost nobody uses this crap
Really? How do you know that? -J > Karel > > -- > Karel Zak <k...@redhat.com> > http://karelzak.blogspot.com > -- in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
