> (Apologies for two replies to the same message.) > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:23:22PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:19:06 -0600, "Ken Ismert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > BTW, gcc is crap and I pray everyday someone will come up > > > with a BSD licensed replacement (there was ipf and now there > > > isn't. Wish the same effort would happen for gcc) and I much > > > prefer vi to emacs. > > > > We fight all the time against microcode and non-free firmware. > > > > Guess what compiler most of that microcode and firmware is compiled > > with? > > So you're blaming the compiler (or its authors, etc.) for the uses to > which it's put? Or are you saying that the authors of GCC should only > allow it to be used for "good" and not "evil"?
So you're blaming the ports scaffold (or its authors, etc.) for the uses to which it's put? Or are you saying that the ports scaffold should only allow it to be used for "good" and not "evil"?
