[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: more evil firmwares found

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 22:34:33 -0500, Ryan Underwood <nemesis-lists@icequake.net> said: 

> On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 03:43:48PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> OK, so allow there to be sourceless non-programs.  Seems reasonable
>> to me, though I might change my mind.

> That is *absolutely* the concession that I have been after.  I don't
> understand why it is so difficult to draw out, considering the
> verbal distinction in DFSG between "software" and "program".  It
> seems that most people would rather use pedantic technicalities to
> circumvent the verbage of the DFSG.

	Well, because some of us think that we are losing an important
 freedom once we narrow the source requirement to only
 ``programs''. And, in this day of fast interpreters, what is one mans
 data is another mans executable script.  I would consider, say,
 postscript to be a script, for example.

Does biff in bo work coz it biffin doesn't beep an if biff in bo is
broke then biff in bo I will delete I've tried biff in bo with 'y'
I've tried biff in bo with '-y' no biffin output does it show so poor
wee biff is gonna go. John Spence <jspence@lynx.net.au> on debian-user
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: