Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:17:56 -0700 From: wes@intele.net To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: -questions etiquette Message-ID: <199603270117.SAA25965@obie.softweyr.com> In-Reply-To: <199603261720.KAA15019@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <01I2RTI28U7600K419@HOOVER.STANFORD.EDU> <199603261720.KAA15019@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Annelise Andersen said:
% I agree with both David and Wes here.....
%
% But I would like to say that I would rather have a rude answer than
% no answer at all--I'd rather have someone say "You idiot, read ___"
% than not get anything....
Er, yeah. A reply of the ilk "Closely examine section X.Y of the
Handbook" would be nicer, especially if *not* postfixed with "through
your bellybutton." But a snide reply is better than no reply, as long
as it answers the question.
I found myself getting so irritated at some of the accusatory, flame-
bait questions asked last winter that after railing at a couple of
people in private e-mail only to find those mail messages posted back
to the list, I stayed away from here for several months. Now I just
ignore those too stupid and rude to pose their questions nicely.
You'll notice I *did* respond to you a couple of times, though. ;^)
% And I have posted a question recently that has not been answered at
% all, about why pgp does not compile on 2.1. And I think not answering
% is rude.
Sometimes "no answer" means nodoby on this list has knowlege of your
problem. To wit, my friend Terry Lambert wittily replied:
> I don't know, I don't use PGP; I think it's silly without a recognized
> key authority.
The crux of issue, if you're truly interested in security. The
problem with PGP is that someone else may get assigned the same key
you get, since there is no central authority for distributing keys.
I'd like to modify Terry's statement to "recognized, *trusted* key
authority.
> That aside, I think that the newest version was reported to compile
> without changes; perhaps you should update your sources? It might
> get you running code, even if it doesn't make the port work.
Many standard packages on the net now configure or compile for FreeBSD
in their own right. Anytime you have problems with a port, check to
see if the package self-configures for FreeBSD; you may be pleasantly
surprised. ;^)
--
Wes Peters | Yes I am a pirate, two hundred years too late
Softweyr | The cannons don't thunder, there's nothing to plunder
Consulting | I'm an over forty victim of fate...
wes@intele.net | Jimmy Buffett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603270117.SAA25965>