*BSD News Article 26359


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uunet!news.smith.edu!jfieber
From: jfieber@sophia.smith.edu (J Fieber)
Subject: Re: <Proposal> Rename of the 386bsd groups
Message-ID: <1994Jan21.214820.10404@sophia.smith.edu>
Organization: Smith College, Northampton, MA, USA
References: <ETLDNCN.94Jan21133424@paddington.ericsson.se> <CJzrsG.I6s@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 1994 21:48:20 GMT
Lines: 32

In article <CJzrsG.I6s@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>,
Jim Pitts <pitts@mimosa.astro.indiana.edu> wrote:
>In article <ETLDNCN.94Jan21133424@paddington.ericsson.se>,
> <etldncn@paddington.ericsson.se> wrote:
>>Hi BSD fans,
>>
>>I have a suggestion. Why not rename all the comp.os.386bsd groups to
>>comp.unix.pc.net2bsd or comp.unix.net2bsd? 
>>
>
>Why 'net2bsd'?  Why not 'freebsd'? 

Putting in "pc" isn't really appropriate for the broad platform
coverage goals of NetBSD.  "freebsd" is inappropriate unless it
is thought necessary really separate it from NetBSD.  It *is* fair
to call both systems net2 derived.  (Then again, it is also fair
to call them both 386bsd derived...)

Some options:

comp                    no arguments
os/unix                 any opinions here?
net2/net2bsd/bsdnet2    ???

Does anybody think there is a reason to establish separete groups
for NetBSD and FreeBSD?  I don't think so; the mailing lists work
just fine for the really specific discussions.

-john
-- 
=== jfieber@sophia.smith.edu ================================================
======================================= Come up and be a kite!  --K. Bush ===