Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!csn!raven!rcd From: rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: Re: 386bsd -- The New Newsgroup Message-ID: <1992Sep10.024910@eklektix.com> Organization: eklektix - Boulder, Colorado References: <18iprpINNg6e@agate.berkeley.edu> <1992Sep8.154156.2672@resonex.com> <scs.716042844@wotan.iti.org> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 02:49:10 GMT Lines: 26 scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes: >The problem with `386bsd' is that the name is inherently confusing. The >casual reader will not be able to distinguish it from BSDI nor from the >many other x86 commercial Unixes. The names 386BSD and BSD/386 (the free system and the BSDI system) are similar enough to the casual first-time reader to cause confusion regard- less of a newsgroup name. Better to have [a part of] the newsgroup name precisely match what you're talking about--in this case, 386bsd. I don't see any chance for confusing the name 386bsd with any of the "other x86 commercial Unixes"--they're just "not BSD" enough to confuse anyone. >I would strongly suggest forming comp.unix.freebsd... Whatever direction it goes, I think it's time to get it out of the comp.unix hierarchy. There's always been this minor argument about the inconsistency of comp.unix.* vs comp.os.<whatever-os-name>.*, but things have stayed under comp.unix because of the inertia. Consider USL's legal maneuvering and their very strong desire not to have the word "UNIX" associated with anything we'll talk about here. Also consider that nothing now sold under the UNIX trademark has any of the original important charac- teristics of the UNIX system. Really, comp.unix.* just doesn't fit. -- Dick Dunn rcd@raven.eklektix.com -or- raven!rcd Boulder, Colorado ...intel happens!