Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!mintaka!ogicse!pdxgate!eecs!griffith
From: griffith@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Michael Griffith)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Put the internals back in comp.unix.internals!
Keywords: internals unix comp.unix.internals
Message-ID: <325@pdxgate.UUCP>
Date: 13 Oct 90 06:50:14 GMT
Sender: news@pdxgate.UUCP
Distribution: comp
Lines: 18

Perhaps I'm wrong, but doesn't internals imply a discussion on the internals
of Unix? (Which I take to mean things pretty close to a kernel level...)
This is what I subscribed to this group for, but I see little difference
between this group and comp.unix.*. I think the catagories need to be
subdivided into a sense making order. comp.unix.programming for programming,
internals for internals, etc. I don't see any need to choose wizards over
internals because both seem more like programming to me. I think that posts
on low level things, such as device drivers are appropriate. I think that
the trojan horse stuff should go into comp.unix.security or comp.unix.hackers
or something. I'm more interested in hearing people discuss really low level
concepts. But hey, just my $0.02. Granted, the trojan horse stuff almost
makes my definition of internals, but I'm getting tired of 18 billion
"Trojan Horse" subjects every time I try to read the group.


| Michael Griffith                     | If I had an opinion it certainly   |
| griffith@eecs.ee.pdx.edu             | wouldn't be the same one as        |
| ...!tektronix!psueea!eecs!griffith   | Portland State University anyways. |