Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bruce.cs.monash.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!cs.umd.edu!mojo.eng.umd.edu!harmonic.eng.umd.edu!chuckr From: chuckr@glue.umd.edu (Charles B. Robey) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: Coexisting on the PC Date: 4 Mar 1994 21:24:46 GMT Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park, MD Lines: 29 Message-ID: <2l88uu$hbd@mojo.eng.umd.edu> References: <CLz6un.A9G@rex.uokhsc.edu> <CLzu0M.J9s@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <1994Mar3.190752.16178@xilinx.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: harmonic.eng.umd.edu X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] Lou Sanchez-Chopitea (lou@xilinx.com) wrote: : I diagree that DOS is the motivation. He mentions PC, as in hardware. : The hardware is at least hierarchical to the first two levels he mentions : and a good number (all?) of the operating systems that run on the PC : architecture use the third. I can't comment on the fourth but it does : make sense to go all the way. A naming convention for which you can : write rules instead of lists will pay for itself. One thing to remember here is that it's BSD. Its got to act like BSD. Its lots easier to stay to one standard, even if its not the ideal, than to have the ideal standard that's different everywhere. Before you change to a naming convention that different, even for the best, clearest of motives, you have to decide that the previous standard isn't just bad, its totally unliveable. Otherwise, let the documentation do its job and let me not have to learn six flavors of partitioning info. This applies to screwdrivers and software both. This doesn't mean that a standard must be totally universal, just that you should have a very, very good reason for making a new one. The question here is, does the existing naming convention allow all the functions required. "Clearer" or "Better" doesn't enter into until you've decided that it *must* be changed. Chuck Robey chuckr@eng.umd.edu