The future of fortune(6)

[Jack L.]

On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at komquats.com>
wrote:

> In message <CAJ-Vmo=puH=3+5HbKop3+WzyG35idZa-CMFSMJmfNmRyG7zFCw@
> mail.gmail.c
> om>
> , Adrian Chadd writes:
> > hi,
> >
> > Pardon me, but it's 2017 and the 4.3BSD system index isn't an immutable
> bible
> > .
> >
> > As a general push to packaging things in general, turning fortune into
> > a package seems like some low hanging fruit.
> >
> >
> >
> > -adrian
>
> I see no reason why fortune(6) cannot be a port. Much of /usr/games (IIRC
> that's where it was) has been gutted anyway and not only that but other
> more functional parts of 4.4BSD have been culled and are simply gone.
>
> I think the way forward is:
>
> 1. Make fortune a port.
>
> 2. Whatever was in games and is in ports could be installed through a
> bsd-games meta-port.
>
> People should realize that ports are just as valid as base. Not everything
> should be in base. This will become truer once base is fully distributed as
> packages. A monolithic base is so 1960s. Even the IBM mainframe I worked on
> in the 1970s used packages (IBM called them FMIDs). Let's get on with the
> 1970s and move it to ports/packages.
>
>
> Yes! I've always been annoyed (in the past) with doing an rm -rf
/usr/games in my new server installs.