Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sdchema.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!drutx!houxe!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!sdchema!jwp From: jwp@sdchema.UUCP Newsgroups: net.bugs.uucp Subject: Re: UUCP sitenames / Sys V fix Message-ID: <227@sdchema.UUCP> Date: Wed, 5-Sep-84 02:34:26 EDT Article-I.D.: sdchema.227 Posted: Wed Sep 5 02:34:26 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 1-Sep-84 13:00:39 EDT References: <25@harvard.ARPA> Reply-To: jwp@sdchema.UUCP (John Pierce) Organization: Chemistry Dept, UC San Diego Lines: 27 In article <25@harvard.ARPA> brownell@harvard.ARPA (Dave Brownell) writes: >... if anyone running the Sys V UUCP really worries, it's easy to make it > send out long names... Unfortunately, Dave, this fails against the same sort of reasoning that is going to impose short identifiers on us. Specifically, we all have to be reduced to the least common denominator... To be explicit, Bell, or AT&T, or whatever name it's going under these days, has decided to force crappy thinking on the world, and all of us will have to conform to it, even though we have code that can handle this. Or source code so we could do what they should have done in the first place. You see, they've made a lot of money peddling binary-only licenses... Interestingly, at least some of the people who are going to shove this down our throats (by refusing to "register" sites with non-conforming names) were at UCB way back when... Then it was "You mean *you don't have a VAX*???? You mean you've only got an *11/40*??? With *RK05s*????? Well, that's too bad, buddy... We've got all this fine software, but if that's all you've got... Well... that's tough, man..." Now, of course, it's "Oh... You wanna run the UNIX standard on a Kaypro II? Hey, babe, don't worry!! We'll just lower the standard so you can say you conform to it." Sic semper venditori. Caveat Danaos... John Pierce, Chemistry, UC San Diego sdcsvax!sdchema!jwp