Re: [gentoo-user] Re: From where the word 'gentoo' came?

[Alan E. Davis]

Furthermore, the following publication is at least close enough to start
on.  I don't have access today.

@article{forster1781natural,
  title={Natural History and Description of the Tyger-Cat of the Cape
of Good Hope. By John Reinhold Forster, LL. DFR and AS},
  author={Forster, J.R.},
  journal={Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London},
  volume={71},
  pages={1--6},
  year={1781},
  publisher={JSTOR}
}
Alan



On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Alan E. Davis <lngndvs@×××××.com> wrote:

> Actually, the full nomenclatural information is:
>
> *Pygoscelis papua* (J.R. Forster<http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/J.R._Forster>,
> 1781).  So there is a publication by J. R. Forster in 1781, describing this
> penguin.
>
> Alan
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Alan E. Davis <lngndvs@×××××.com> wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth (possibly nothing), from Wikipedia:
>>
>> The application of *Gentoo* to the penguin is unclear, according to the *
>> OED <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OED>*, which reports that *Gentoo* was
>> an Anglo-Indian term, used as early as 1638 to distinguish Hindus<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu>in India from Muslims, the English term originating in Portuguese
>> *gentio* (compare "gentile <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentile>"); in
>> the twentieth century the term came to be regarded as derogatory<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derogatory>
>> .
>>
>> This needs to be followed up.  One interesting publication would be
>>
>> @article{calaby1999european,
>>   title={The European Discovery and Scientific Description of Australian Birds.},
>>   author={Calaby, JH},
>>   journal={Historical Records of Australian Science},
>>   volume={12},
>>   number={3},
>>   pages={313--329},
>>   year={1999},
>>   publisher={CSIRO}
>> }
>>
>> to which I do not have access.  However, this investigation is not over.  The scientific name of the Gentoo Penguin is *Pygoscelis papua. It should not be difficult to find the original description?*
>>
>>
>>
>> Alan Davis
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de>wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/21/2011 04:59 PM, Joshua Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 7:32 AM, LinuxIsOne<reallife@hmamail.**com<reallife@×××××××.com>>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Daniel Troeder<daniel@×××××××××.com>
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Also (ir)relevant: bug report concerning the mascot Larry the cow:
>>>>>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_**bug.cgi?id=27727<https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27727>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But your links shows untrusted connection in my browser!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That would likely be because cacert.org isn't a "trusted' authority by
>>>> default and that is the issuer for B.G.O., making the certificate
>>>> throw up a red flag if you choose not to add cacert.org to your
>>>> trusted authorities.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What sucks is that you can't even get rid of the warnings even if you
>>> accept and add the cert to Firefox.  Every time you click on an attachment
>>> in a bug, you get presented with a warning dialog again, and again, and
>>> again, and again, until you get mad and start shooting bunnies.  That's
>>> because the domain changes with attachments (for some reason, b.g.o. uses
>>> subdomains instead of URLs to link to attachments.)
>>>
>>> So it's either add cacert.org to your trusted authorities, or live in
>>> hell when browsing b.g.o.  IMO that's just stupid.  I want to trust just
>>> b.g.o, not every site out there that has a cacert certificate.  Stupid.
>>>  Just stupid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>