i think the newline is superfluous and so i'll probably wait for why 2.0 before installing a pirated copy of it. yeah i know its GPL, but i just gotta be me…
Name:
Anonymous2012-02-13 3:38
>>2
The newline is actually a workaround for the infamous (and unpatched) bash put-the-prompt-on-the-same-line-as-the-last-outputted-line-of-the-last-command bug.
What do you mean by `pirate'? Are you going to buy a copy from seafaring murderous thugs? Why would you do that? That attitude hurts all of the Free Software Movement.
Name:
Anonymous2012-02-13 7:10
/bin/why /bin is deprecated, please use /usr/bin instead.
Licensed under the GPLv3 (or later).
I can't wait for this version to have seventeen flags that do nothing related to the program. Meanwhile the MIT/BSD version remains pure, which leads to people bitching that it ``isn't as good''.
Name:
Anonymous2012-02-14 22:02
Please use int main(void); for the definition of main
Colors RevColor(int a)
{
switch(a)
{
case 0:
return Black;
case 1:
return Red;
case 2:
return Green;
case 3:
return Yellow;
case 4:
return Blue;
case 5:
return Magenta;
case 6:
return Cyan;
case 7:
return White;
default:
return Blue;
}
}
Attr RevAttr(int a)
{
switch(a)
{
case 0:
return Reset;
case 1:
return Bright;
case 2:
return Dim;
case 3:
return Underline;
case 4:
return Blink;
case 7:
return Reverse;
case 8:
return Hidden;
default:
return Bright;
}
}
Install with the following: gcc -lm -o why why.c; sudo cp ./why /bin/why && echo "Done Installing!"
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(void){return system("echo Fuck you, that's why.");}
Name:
Anonymous2012-02-16 21:46
>>30
You are right, that looks terrible. I actually wrote this to act as a shell for people that tried to SSH into the 4chan FTP server that I was running, where it would simply display random shit in random colors. I wanted to see just how convoluted I could get it. Obviously, that block didn't work, so I moved on to the next trivial bit and tried to fuck around with it. I didn't intend, when writing, for it to ever be used in such a critical tool as why. I hope that some real hacker* can someday fix it up nicer.
>>28
Without a name (or pseudonym) attached to that work, there is no effective reason why there should be a copyright attached to it. If you publish your own work and you're anonymous, that work is nothing less than public domain work.