Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!uwvax!grilled.cs.wisc.edu!jcargill From: jcargill@grilled.cs.wisc.edu (Jon Cargille) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: 386bsd -- The New Newsgroup <Summary> Message-ID: <1992Sep13.204309.8174@cs.wisc.edu> Date: 13 Sep 92 20:43:09 GMT References: <22376@venera.isi.edu> <1992Sep12.205451.15726@terminator.cc.umich.edu> <1992Sep12.232207.25719@cs.sfu.ca> Sender: news@cs.wisc.edu (The News) Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison CS Dept Lines: 38 In article <1992Sep12.232207.25719@cs.sfu.ca> bremner@cs.sfu.ca (David Bremner) writes: > >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. > There are reasons other then political. How about the fact that most 386bsd users won't want to read about bsd/386, *much* *less* some SYSV-based intel unix? >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) > Hate it, hate it, hate it. Why should people have to read about systems they're not interested it, just because they're (possibly) similar? By this reasoning, we could just do away with newgroups altogether, and revert to one top-level group called 'news'. If everyone had *really* nifty threaded newsreaders, it might work... Not! Let's not throw things together that don't naturally share readership, just to satisfy an urge to "order" the namespace. Jon -- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. Jon Cargille jcargill@cs.wisc.edu Want your .sig compressed? Reasonable rates and fast turnaround. Call today!