fortune package in fc3, are they serious?! - Linux

This is a discussion on fortune package in fc3, are they serious?! - Linux ; I use Fedora Core 3 and am quite pleased with it. I wanted to have the command line program, "fortune" on my system again, it is amusing to read sometimes when I am bored. I found fortune on the dag ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

  1. fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    I use Fedora Core 3 and am quite pleased with it. I wanted to have the
    command line program, "fortune" on my system again, it is amusing to read
    sometimes when I am bored. I found fortune on the dag fc3 repository and
    installed it with yum. It works fine and I have my fortune back.

    [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ rpm -q fortune
    fortune-1.0-35.1.fc3.rf

    What is unsettling is some of the "fortunes". Here I did three in a row,
    pay particular attention to the 2nd one:

    [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    I am the wandering glitch -- catch me if you can.
    [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    nohup rm -fr /&
    [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    A halted retreat
    Is nerve-wracking and dangerous.
    To retain people as men -- and maidservants
    Brings good fortune.
    [ohmster@ohmster ~]$

    ....are they kidding me or what? Do you see that second fortune? What if a
    newbie actually pasted that line into his prompt and ran it, especially
    as root?!

    nohup rm -fr /&

    Is this supposed to be a joke? Yeah I see it and sure, it is pretty
    funny, ha hah, but I know a little about linux, what would a newbie do?
    Wouldn't this really hose the entire distro and file system?

    From the fortune man page:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    FILES
    Note: these are the defaults as defined at compile time.

    /usr/share/games/fortune
    Directory for innoffensive fortunes.
    /usr/share/games/fortune/off
    Directory for offensive fortunes.

    If a particular set of fortunes is particularly unwanted, there
    is an easy solu-
    tion: delete the associated .dat file. This leaves the data
    intact, should the
    file later be wanted, but since fortune no longer finds the
    pointers file, it
    ignores the text file.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    So would that second fortune be an "offensive fortune"? What is wrong
    with these people? That is not so much offensive as downright dangerous,
    IMHO.

    Comments, please? Anyone else ever had weird fortunes like this? Thanks.

    --
    ~Ohmster
    ohmster at newsguy dot com

  2. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    * Ohmster wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > I use Fedora Core 3 and am quite pleased with it. I wanted to have the
    > command line program, "fortune" on my system again, it is amusing to read
    > sometimes when I am bored. I found fortune on the dag fc3 repository and
    > installed it with yum. It works fine and I have my fortune back.


    > [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ rpm -q fortune
    > fortune-1.0-35.1.fc3.rf


    > What is unsettling is some of the "fortunes". Here I did three in a row,
    > pay particular attention to the 2nd one:


    > [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    > I am the wandering glitch -- catch me if you can.
    > [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    > nohup rm -fr /&
    > [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    > A halted retreat
    > Is nerve-wracking and dangerous.
    > To retain people as men -- and maidservants
    > Brings good fortune.
    > [ohmster@ohmster ~]$


    > ...are they kidding me or what? Do you see that second fortune? What if a
    > newbie actually pasted that line into his prompt and ran it, especially
    > as root?!


    > nohup rm -fr /&


    > Is this supposed to be a joke? Yeah I see it and sure, it is pretty


    Dude, you are taking fortune MUCH to seriously.

    [05:36:44][J:1][sinner@~]$ which fortune
    /usr/games/fortune

    Note where it is located. Anyone, newbie or other, that types in what to
    them is a cryptic command at a prompt as root having no idea what they
    are typing, gets what they deserve.

    No, that is not considered an 'offensive' fortune. When you see one, you
    will know it, but unless you specifically installed the offensive
    package you shouldnt see very many.

    --
    David
    The best cure for insomnia is to get a lot of sleep. -W.C. Fields

  3. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    Ohmster wrote:

    Don't get your knickers in a knot. A newbie would hose his machine. Big
    deal. That teaches him to think before doing.

    --
    Ruurd
    ..o.
    ...o
    ooo

  4. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    "R.F. Pels" wrote in news:d7aues$ob0$1
    @news1.zwoll1.ov.home.nl:

    > Don't get your knickers in a knot. A newbie would hose his machine. Big
    > deal. That teaches him to think before doing.


    LOL! Roger that, thanks RF.

    --
    ~Ohmster
    ohmster at newsguy dot com

  5. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in news:kl8nm2xg74.ln2
    @news.gates_of_hell.com:

    > Dude, you are taking fortune MUCH to seriously.
    >
    > [05:36:44][J:1][sinner@~]$ which fortune
    > /usr/games/fortune
    >
    > Note where it is located. Anyone, newbie or other, that types in what to
    > them is a cryptic command at a prompt as root having no idea what they
    > are typing, gets what they deserve.
    >
    > No, that is not considered an 'offensive' fortune. When you see one, you
    > will know it, but unless you specifically installed the offensive
    > package you shouldnt see very many.


    Yeah alright, maybe I need to get out more. LOL!

    Thanks David.

    --
    ~Ohmster
    ohmster at newsguy dot com

  6. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    R.F. Pels wrote:

    > Ohmster wrote:
    >
    > Don't get your knickers in a knot. A newbie would hose his machine. Big
    > deal. That teaches him to think before doing.
    >

    I did something very much like that, way back when. It left an indelible
    impression on my mind. As a rank newbie (running as root, of course), I
    didn't have much on the drive yet - but I did have to reinstall. Live and
    learn, and don't believe everything people tell you...


    --
    "If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith."
    -- Albert Einstein


  7. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    Baruch wrote in
    news:Xc9me.2537$uu.573@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com:

    > I did something very much like that, way back when. It left an
    > indelible impression on my mind. As a rank newbie (running as root,
    > of course), I didn't have much on the drive yet - but I did have to
    > reinstall. Live and learn, and don't believe everything people tell
    > you...


    Yeah really. I cannot *believe* that they would put something like that in
    fortune and not even put a warning on it. That would do it alright. Sorry
    you got nailed, Baruch, but you learned alright, didn't you? ;>)

    --
    ~Ohmster
    ohmster at newsguy dot com

  8. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    In article , Baruch wrote:
    >R.F. Pels wrote:
    >
    >> Ohmster wrote:


    [nohup rm -fr /& in fortune file]

    >> Don't get your knickers in a knot. A newbie would hose his machine. Big
    >> deal. That teaches him to think before doing.


    "This is what happen when you insist in using root as your 'default' user.
    A reinstall is a cure and punishment." If you are lucky (good backups)
    and can afford the time, this is an excellent way to learn.

    >I did something very much like that, way back when. It left an indelible
    >impression on my mind. As a rank newbie (running as root, of course),


    Yes, there is nothing quite like seeing the world explode around you that
    gives an everlasting impression of "Hmmm, don't do _that_ again".

    It was six months before I even knew who this 'root' account was. I got
    wheel group when I had about 15 months experience, and that allowed
    me to shut systems down and mount/umount disk packs. I think it took
    another six or seven months before I got root. I was terrified that
    something I was going to mistype was going to bring the system down, and
    bring down the wrath of 350 users and more importantly, the sys-admin.
    That was on 4BSD, at least 5 years before linux-0.01. With modern Linux
    (and *BSD) distributions, root is often the first account a newbie gets.

    As regards the fortunes - I'm slightly curious where the O/P found them,
    as 'fortune-mod' was removed from RH9 (actually, from 'phoebe' which was
    the beta for RH9) because of unclear copyright status, and I don't see
    that package on fc-3.91 which was the second beta for FC4. 'fortune-mod'
    version 1.0 was derived from the FreeBSD package, and goes back before
    1995. The specific fortune that's got the O/P concerned is in
    /usr/share/games/fortunes/computers and the third fortune in that file
    ought to give a clue - a Sun2 (not a Sparc 2, but something that quite
    predates the Sparc architecture) and the "apparent" uname output shows
    this to be positively ancient.

    Old guy

  9. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    Ohmster wrote:

    > Baruch wrote in
    > news:Xc9me.2537$uu.573@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com:
    >
    >> I did something very much like that, way back when. It left an
    >> indelible impression on my mind. As a rank newbie (running as root,
    >> of course), I didn't have much on the drive yet - but I did have to
    >> reinstall. Live and learn, and don't believe everything people tell
    >> you...

    >
    > Yeah really. I cannot *believe* that they would put something like that in
    > fortune and not even put a warning on it. That would do it alright. Sorry
    > you got nailed, Baruch, but you learned alright, didn't you? ;>)
    >

    I got nailed, but in my case it didn't matter much... and yes, I learned all
    right. It's kind of like sticking your finger into a light socket. You
    only do it once.


    --
    Smoking is one of the leading causes of statistics.
    -- Fletcher Knebel


  10. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) wrote in
    news:slrnd9l1a5.iso.ibuprofin@compton.phx.az.us:

    > As regards the fortunes - I'm slightly curious where the O/P found them,
    > as 'fortune-mod' was removed from RH9 (actually, from 'phoebe' which was
    > the beta for RH9) because of unclear copyright status, and I don't see
    > that package on fc-3.91 which was the second beta for FC4. 'fortune-mod'
    > version 1.0 was derived from the FreeBSD package, and goes back before
    > 1995. The specific fortune that's got the O/P concerned is in
    > /usr/share/games/fortunes/computers and the third fortune in that file
    > ought to give a clue - a Sun2 (not a Sparc 2, but something that quite
    > predates the Sparc architecture) and the "apparent" uname output shows
    > this to be positively ancient.
    >
    > Old guy


    Got this version of fortune from the dag repository, added it to my
    yum.conf and let yum grab it.

    [dag]
    name=Dag RPM Repository for Fedora Core
    baseurl=http://apt.sw.be/fedora/$releasever/en/$basearch/dag
    enabled=1
    #gpgcheck=1

    URL directly to the file:
    http://apt.sw.be/fedora/3/en/i386/RP...c3.rf.i386.rpm

    Quite a few of them in there, go see:
    http://apt.sw.be/fedora/3/en/i386/RPMS.dag/

    --
    ~Ohmster
    Put "Read Ohmster" in the subject to get past the
    spam filter. Do this and your mail will get through.
    ohmster /a/t/ newsguy dot com

  11. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    Ohmster wrote:

    > Yeah really. I cannot *believe* that they would put something like that in
    > fortune and not even put a warning on it. That would do it alright. Sorry
    > you got nailed, Baruch, but you learned alright, didn't you? ;>)


    Oh, come on. That's as moronic as putting stickers on a lighter that it is a
    fire hazard...

    --
    Ruurd
    ..o.
    ...o
    ooo

  12. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    R.F. Pels wrote:

    > Oh, come on. That's as moronic as putting stickers on a lighter that it is
    > a fire hazard...


    I have a packet of book-matches from an American restaurant that warns
    "contents may cause burns"!

    Chris

    --
    Everything gets easier with practice, except getting up in the morning!

  13. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    * chris wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > R.F. Pels wrote:


    >> Oh, come on. That's as moronic as putting stickers on a lighter that it is
    >> a fire hazard...


    > I have a packet of book-matches from an American restaurant that warns
    > "contents may cause burns"!


    Your point? The warning is still moronic. If we didn't live in a society
    where people feel they have the right to sue because they burned themselves
    on a match where the warning was not present, these MORONIC warnings
    would not be necessary.

    'Don't make toast in the shower with this product'

    FFS, DUH!

    --
    David
    Everywhere in the world, women outnumber men
    -- Murphy's Laws of Dating n4

  14. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    chris wrote:

    > R.F. Pels wrote:
    >
    >> Oh, come on. That's as moronic as putting stickers on a lighter that it
    >> is a fire hazard...

    >
    > I have a packet of book-matches from an American restaurant that warns
    > "contents may cause burns"!
    >
    > Chris
    >

    Some coffee makers have a warning, "Caution. Burners may be hot".


    --
    Fine day to throw a party. Throw him as far as you can.


  15. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    SINNER wrote:

    > * chris wrote in comp.os.linux:
    >> R.F. Pels wrote:

    >
    >>> Oh, come on. That's as moronic as putting stickers on a lighter that it
    >>> is a fire hazard...

    >
    >> I have a packet of book-matches from an American restaurant that warns
    >> "contents may cause burns"!

    >
    > Your point? The warning is still moronic. If we didn't live in a society
    > where people feel they have the right to sue because they burned
    > themselves on a match where the warning was not present, these MORONIC
    > warnings would not be necessary.
    >
    > 'Don't make toast in the shower with this product'
    >
    > FFS, DUH!
    >

    I remember seeing something that suggested that, while stupidity shouldn't
    necessarily be made a capital offense, it might be a good idea to just
    remove the warning labels from things and let nature take its course...


    --
    "I'd love to go out with you, but there are important world issues that
    need worrying about."


  16. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    * Baruch wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > SINNER wrote:


    >> * chris wrote in comp.os.linux:
    >>> R.F. Pels wrote:


    >>>> Oh, come on. That's as moronic as putting stickers on a lighter that it
    >>>> is a fire hazard...


    >>> I have a packet of book-matches from an American restaurant that warns
    >>> "contents may cause burns"!


    >> Your point? The warning is still moronic. If we didn't live in a society
    >> where people feel they have the right to sue because they burned
    >> themselves on a match where the warning was not present, these MORONIC
    >> warnings would not be necessary.


    >> 'Don't make toast in the shower with this product'


    >> FFS, DUH!


    > I remember seeing something that suggested that, while stupidity shouldn't
    > necessarily be made a capital offense, it might be a good idea to just
    > remove the warning labels from things and let nature take its course...


    Likely over at The Darwin Awards. Truer words...


    --
    David
    When in doubt, have a man come through the door with a gun in his hand.
    -- Raymond Chandler

  17. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    Baruch wrote:

    > I remember seeing something that suggested that, while stupidity shouldn't
    > necessarily be made a capital offense, it might be a good idea to just
    > remove the warning labels from things and let nature take its course...


    Absolutely! Natural selection! The gene pool would be better off without
    many of the idiots that appear in http://www.stellaawards.com/!

    Chris

    --
    Everything gets easier with practice, except getting up in the morning!

  18. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    In article , Ohmster wrote:

    >Got this version of fortune from the dag repository, added it to my
    >yum.conf and let yum grab it.


    >URL directly to the file:
    >http://apt.sw.be/fedora/3/en/i386/RP...c3.rf.i386.rpm


    OK, that's just another of the many builds of fortune-mod-1.0 that had been
    part of Red Hat for many years. You can check that by looking at the source,
    or the rpm .spec file that comes with the src.rpm. If you are going to
    blame anyone for including that fortune, the maintainer was Amy A. Lewis a
    student at unc.edu in the mid-90s and Dennis L. Clark, a student in Oz, but
    I think that group of fortunes originated at Berkeley in the 1980s. At that
    stage of the game, you have to remember that _very few_ students had wheel,
    never mind root. All that would happen is that the user who ran that
    command wasted a lot of CPU cycles (getting a slew of "Permission denied"
    messages), till the system finally got around to the user's home directory
    (then in /usr/home/$USERNAME), or the student would get bored with the
    constant stream of error messages. The only excitement might be trying to
    find out how to get the job back into the foreground (or simply saying the
    hell with it, and killing is after a 'ps' to get the process ID).

    >Quite a few of them in there, go see:


    ftp ibiblio.org or ftp ftp-linux.cc.gatech.edu
    cd /pub/linux/

    -rw-r--r-- 1 keeper users 14581180 May 30 10:34 ls-lR.gz

    [compton ~]$ zwc dir.lists/sunsite-ls-lR.05.30.05.gz
    799430 6867743 67329304
    [compton ~]$ zcat dir.lists/sunsite-ls-lR.05.30.05.gz | awk '{total += $5 };
    END {print total }'
    5.42287e+10
    [compton ~]$

    So, the recursive directory listing is only 799,430 lines long, and the
    amount of "stuff" on that server is 54.2287 Gigabytes.

    Old guy

  19. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) wrote in
    news:slrnd9nbts.pn7.ibuprofin@compton.phx.az.us:

    > [compton ~]$ zwc dir.lists/sunsite-ls-lR.05.30.05.gz
    > 799430 6867743 67329304
    > [compton ~]$ zcat dir.lists/sunsite-ls-lR.05.30.05.gz | awk '{total +=
    > $5 }; END {print total }'
    > 5.42287e+10
    > [compton ~]$
    >
    > So, the recursive directory listing is only 799,430 lines long, and
    > the amount of "stuff" on that server is 54.2287 Gigabytes.
    >
    > Old guy


    Gee old guy, you are pretty good with that command line stuff. The story
    was entertaining, thanks.

    --
    ~Ohmster
    "Read Ohmster" in subject, bypass spam filter.
    ohmster /a/t/ newsguy dot com

  20. Re: fortune package in fc3, are they serious?!

    This is an interesting thread and all about how newbies scxxw themselves.
    However I have just two points.

    [ohmster@ohmster ~]$ fortune
    nohup rm -fr /&

    1) This is not a fortune it is probably a bug.
    2) When people type in fortune, I highly doubt they want to see command
    line syntax. Or I suspect that they would not be wasting time typing in
    fortune in the first place.


    maybe fortune is no longer worth installing and will go the way of oh
    "pascal" or my commodore 64 which yes had a port of fortune.

    cheers



+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast