Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!stanford.edu!agate!soda.berkeley.edu!wjolitz From: wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: 386bsd -- The New Newsgroup Date: 9 Sep 1992 19:51:48 GMT Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association Lines: 78 Message-ID: <18lkkkINN14d@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <18iprpINNg6e@agate.berkeley.edu> <1992Sep8.200625.2894@socrates.umd.edu> <veit.716026274@du9ds3> NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu Keywords: newsgroup 386bsd news group In article <veit.716026274@du9ds3> veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de writes: >In <1992Sep8.200625.2894@socrates.umd.edu> john@socrates.umd.edu (John VanAntwerp) writes: > >>In article <18iprpINNg6e@agate.berkeley.edu> wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes: >>> >>>As per Bill's suggestion, here's a breakdown of some of the suggested >>>topics and groups: >>> >>> comp.os.386bsd (general questions and trivia) >>> comp.os.386bsd.kernel (discussion on kernel content/structure) >>> comp.os.386bsd.windows (ditto, on windowing systems like X) >>> comp.os.386bsd.sharedlib (shared library and programming environment) >>> comp.os.386bsd.net (networking topics) >>> comp.os.386bsd.bugs (new bugs) >>> comp.os.386bsd.ann (announcements, fixes, additions) > >>I think that this is a fine set of newsgroups... > >> John >... >We have considerably high traffic on 'I cannot boot with my configuration', say >'newbie' stuff. Since I follow this group quite long, I would have an idea >where to post such a question, but if I were a beginner and desperate >because of 386bsd had just cleaned my whole disk, I would perhaps ignore >the different groups and send my mail to all of them, perhaps to find >one who can answer. Oh, you mean like the UNIX trademark and other soliliquies that we're all wading through? Yes, I suppose some loudmouth could post to everything, but that's what net etiquette is intended to prevent. Newbies post to the general comp.os.386bsd of course. Pretty simple. >I haven't seen much on shared libraries yet in this group, so why sharedlib... The subgroups kernel, windows, sharedlib (for shared libraries, Holger) and net (for networking) are actually research/development topics, and have been of intense interest to those who wish to participate in developing these areas further. Please remember, 386BSD is not a commercial system, but intended to facilitate research and educational inquiry on new work and new paradigms. It is hoped that all of those people who have written me asking to be part of these projects will be able to actually aid/formulate newer models of thought. For example, shared libraries are quite easy to "hack in" (just look at Linux), and for some systems that is probably the best approach -- just get it in there and going. However, there are several considerations that must be dealt with before putting in such a feature. Expedient approaches can result in a long-time legacy that is difficult to support and even impedes new progress in related areas. 386BSD is intended to encourage discussion and involvement throughout the world. It is not an end in itself. We intend to be quite involved in these topics to help others work towards the future. >I if found just a bug in /sys/kern/kern_execve.c, should I post to >comp.os.386bsd.bugs or c.o.3.kernel, just because my detected effects could be >for interest for the latter group as well? And if I fixed the bug on the fly, >should I also send it to c.o.3.ann? Similiar things might happen with >network related things. It depends. If you find a bug but not the solution, you post to "bugs". If you find the fix, you post to "ann". The kernel and networking groups are intended for basic new work in the kernel and in networking. Knowing the quality of work you already have accomplished with 386BSD, Holgar, I am sure that your involvement in at least one of these research topic groups would be a great asset. In general, I've been most impressed with the talent and critical eye taken with respect to these topics thus far, and I know that there is much more to openly consider and discuss. Once we get these groups rolling, I don't think it will be difficult to differentiate. Lynne Jolitz.