Xref: utzoo news.groups:5797 comp.os.v:21
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!cs.utexas.edu!halley!bc
From: bc@halley.UUCP (Bill Crews)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.os.v
Subject: Re: comp.os.v ?
Message-ID: <397@halley.UUCP>
Date: 24 Oct 88 19:41:15 GMT
References: <1270@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> <9265@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: bc@halley.UUCP (Bill Crews)
Organization: Tandem Computers, Austin, TX
Lines: 19

In article <9265@watdragon.waterloo.edu> rfpfeifle@violet.waterloo.edu (Ron Pfeifle) writes:
>In article <1270@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> emv@mailgw.cc.umich.edu (Ed Vielmetti) writes:
>>Given the amount of discussion about Mach, I'd be tempted to go one
>>for one, remove comp.os.v and create comp.os.mach.
>
>This would be the right thing to do if V was a Unixish based system (maybe),
>but it isn't.  It has different basis (SSR message passing).

What does the Unixishness of V or of Mach have to do with their validity as
comp.os newsgroups?  The interesting parts of Mach are the nonUnix parts,
mostly.

I vote for more traffic on V and a separate comp.os.mach newsgroup.  Probably
shouldn't be debated here, though.

-bc
-- 
Bill Crews                        bc@halley.UUCP
(512) 244-8350                    ..!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!halley!bc