svn commit: r362422 - head/sbin/dump

[Warner Losh]

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:46 PM Ian Lepore <ian at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2020-06-20 at 07:57 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 7:27 AM Hans Petter Selasky <hps at selasky.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 2020-06-20 13:10, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> > > > > Author: imp
> > > > > Date: Sat Jun 20 04:19:17 2020
> > > > > New Revision: 362422
> > > > > URL:https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/362422
> > > > >
> > > > > Log:
> > > > >    Increase the whimsy in this file by famring dump's work out to
> > >
> > > minions. Adjust
> > > > >    variables accordingly. Thankfully, we are able to do this
> without
> > >
> > > additional
> > > > >    banana expenditures.
> > > >
> > > > This flys in the face of its intent and as a "commit" is more
> > > > racially biased than the code was!
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Warner,
> > >
> > > Maybe a stupid question, but is this the correct meaning or description
> > > of minion?
> > >
> > > https://www.google.com/search?q=minions
> > >
> > > minion; plural noun: minions
> > >
> > >      a follower or underling of a powerful person, especially a servile
> > > or unimportant one.
> > >      "he gets oppressed minions like me to fob them off"
> > >
> > > "Minion" is still a person, like "slave" is, so I must say I agree with
> > > Rodney about this, I don't see how this makes it any better? Can you
> > > explain?
> > >
> >
> > For me, Minions come from the Despicable Me movies and sequels. They work
> > for Gru, who pays them for their services. They love Bananas and often do
> > crazy things for a banana. They work for Gru willingly. They are free to
> > leave at any time. They are sad at the prospect of Gru having to lay them
> > off.
> >
> > Minions are also, as you point out, employed by the powerful to
> accomplish
> > things. Key word here is 'employed'. Servile doesn't mean 'involuntary
> > servitude' but rather 'an excessive willingness to please.' Underling
> means
> > only that them are below them on the org chart. There's no inherent
> > implication of an abusive relationship, per se, though that happens as in
> > any power relationship between people.
> >
> > And the extensive searching I did before the commit showed no complaints
> > about the movies, or that this term had some coded, racist history. Or
> any
> > other coded history that's problematic. Or any overt history for that
> > matter.
> >
> > SaltStack uses it as their name for agents that carry out tasks, for
> > example.
> >
> > So what am I missing?
> >
>
> Common sense, apparently
>

Not helpful.

However, I've had a couple other, private email messages that were helpful
and gave the context I was missing. I've reverted.

Warner