On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 21:20:19 -0500, David H. Lynch Jr. wrote: >So if I write a non-free insecure kernel and install it via ports that >is acceptable. >You are trying to argue both pragmatism and principle concurrently, >You are obviously free to try but it makes things very easy for me.
<snip loads of more fantasia bullshit> What the fuck are you on? The Koolaid from FSF? You have postulated totally impossible crap here for days now but this takes the cake! You wrote about a port of a program designed to mailbomb Jewish sites. A total wanker dream not a thing that would ever be submitted. Probably an impossible dream. But you are a self-confessed miracle coder so your bent mind could probably do it. Getting it accepted anywhere including at KKK headquarters might be problematic. Now a non-free kernel that is insecure. I'll bet you could mash something together. Get it to install from ports, I don't think so. Get it accepted into ports? Thin to none. You see, the apps that are unfree which make it into ports are those in big demand because they are useful or fun to run on their home OS and some folk want to not run that OS. Nothing you write is going to get over that hurdle. Wanker. Rod/ Me...a skeptic? I trust you have proof.
