Commit Message
Hello
I propose the following patch, which deletes the abortion joke from the
glibc manual. The joke does not provide any useful information about the
abort() function so removing it will not hinder use of glibc.
Thank you.
Comments
On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 1:07 PM, <rain1@airmail.cc> wrote:
>
> I propose the following patch, which deletes the abortion joke from the
> glibc manual. The joke does not provide any useful information about the
> abort() function so removing it will not hinder use of glibc.
Ugh, is that still there? It wasn't funny twenty years ago and it's
only gotten less funny since. I'm in favor of removing it. Any
objections?
zw
On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 01:58:19PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 1:07 PM, <rain1@airmail.cc> wrote:
> >
> > I propose the following patch, which deletes the abortion joke from the
> > glibc manual. The joke does not provide any useful information about the
> > abort() function so removing it will not hinder use of glibc.
>
> Ugh, is that still there? It wasn't funny twenty years ago and it's
> only gotten less funny since. I'm in favor of removing it. Any
> objections?
>
Objection, it became funny again with Trump's administration.
> I propose the following patch, which deletes the abortion joke from the
> glibc manual.
I'm not sure if it was intended as a joke. People quite literally
believe such things.
I think we can remove the note because it's not in one of the formally
Invariant Sections, so let's do it.
I believe you don't have commit access yourself. Should I push this
along with a suitable ChangeLog entry?
We should also clean up the language regarding the risk of
distributing cryptography code.
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 11:02 AM, Ondřej Bílka <neleai@seznam.cz> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 01:58:19PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 1:07 PM, <rain1@airmail.cc> wrote:
>> >
>> > I propose the following patch, which deletes the abortion joke from the
>> > glibc manual. The joke does not provide any useful information about the
>> > abort() function so removing it will not hinder use of glibc.
>>
>> Ugh, is that still there? It wasn't funny twenty years ago and it's
>> only gotten less funny since. I'm in favor of removing it. Any
>> objections?
>>
> Objection, it became funny again with Trump's administration.
Oddly enough, I think Trump's election made it even less funny. But
also, whether or not you think it's a good joke - and I want to
reiterate that I don't think it was _ever_ a good joke - joking about
this particular topic is deeply inappropriate for The Gnu C Library
Manual, in my opinion.
zw
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
...
> We should also clean up the language regarding the risk of
> distributing cryptography code.
I have a patch in hand that does that (just drops the entire section -
we can't practically keep it up to date so better not to get into it
at all).
zw
* Zack Weinberg:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> ...
>> We should also clean up the language regarding the risk of
>> distributing cryptography code.
>
> I have a patch in hand that does that (just drops the entire section -
> we can't practically keep it up to date so better not to get into it
> at all).
Sounds good. Please also remove all references to FIPS, which are
outdated as well.
I agree with removing this joke. A bit of humor is fine - indeed, the manual
could use a bit more than it has - but this attempt at humor does not work. The
manual should be high-quality, and that includes high-quality jokes.
On 04/28/2018 01:58 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 1:07 PM, <rain1@airmail.cc> wrote:
>>
>> I propose the following patch, which deletes the abortion joke from the
>> glibc manual. The joke does not provide any useful information about the
>> abort() function so removing it will not hinder use of glibc.
>
> Ugh, is that still there? It wasn't funny twenty years ago and it's
> only gotten less funny since. I'm in favor of removing it. Any
> objections?
I'm with Florian and Paul, the joke is not in an invariant section (which
I would also like to remove, but that's another story), and is not appropriate
for a technical manual. I had never noticed the joke myself or I would have
proposed removal earlier.
Please remove the joke in a single commit and not mix the removal with
anything else.
From d8cae2653abb0c9b4c63649cac5861ca44b342e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Raymond Nicholson <rain1@airmail.cc>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 18:00:34 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] * manual/startup.texi: remove abortion joke from the
documentation of abort().
---
manual/startup.texi | 8 --------
1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
@@ -1005,14 +1005,6 @@ This function actually terminates the process by raising a
intercept this signal; see @ref{Signal Handling}.
@end deftypefun
-@c Put in by rms. Don't remove.
-@cartouche
-@strong{Future Change Warning:} Proposed Federal censorship regulations
-may prohibit us from giving you information about the possibility of
-calling this function. We would be required to say that this is not an
-acceptable way of terminating a program.
-@end cartouche
-
@node Termination Internals
@subsection Termination Internals
--
2.17.0