Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!wupost!gumby!destroyer!ubc-cs!fornax!bremner From: bremner@cs.sfu.ca (David Bremner) Subject: Re: 386bsd -- The New Newsgroup <Summary> Message-ID: <1992Sep12.232207.25719@cs.sfu.ca> Reply-To: bremner@cs.sfu.ca (David Bremner) Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada References: <22376@venera.isi.edu> <1992Sep12.205451.15726@terminator.cc.umich.edu> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 23:22:07 GMT Lines: 33 In article <1992Sep12.205451.15726@terminator.cc.umich.edu> pauls@umich.edu writes: > >Did I fail to represent anyone who has posted in this thread so far? > >I would like to get a feel for what sort of support each of these >positions has. Please either follow up or email me. My own proposal was to move comp.unix.bsd to comp.os.bsd; unless USL wins, in which case we are all in deep doo-doo. Then subgroups of comp.os.bsd could be created for 386bsd and other bsd based systems. My attachment to a unified bsd hierarchy does not seem to be shared by the other posters in the thread, or by Lynne Jolitz. I'm not sure whether or not two separate newsgroups are needed for bsd386 and 386/bsd. I realize there are political considerations here, but comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit ( or whatever it is called ) serves about 6 major flavours of SYS V based unix on intel processors. In a soundbite comp.os.bsd comp.os.bsd.pc-clone Which would cover bsd386, 386/bsd, mach-386, BNRSS-386, (the last two only in regard to their BSD nature, not their mach nature) Cheers, David -- bremner@cs.sfu.ca ubc-cs!fornax!bremner