Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:4717 comp.unix.microport:2740 news.groups:7115 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!ames!amdahl!uunet!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.microport,news.groups Subject: Re: The right name for the 386 unix group Message-ID: <2943@ficc.uu.net> Date: 30 Jan 89 20:13:07 GMT References: Organization: Xenix Support Lines: 24 I said I wouldn't get involved in this. I lied. The bus is a red herring. In article , eric@snark.uu.net (Eric S. Raymond) writes: > The name 'comp.unix.i386' isn't good enough. Dave Mack was unnecessarily nasty > but he was right. We don't want the Roadrunner people here, not because we > dislike them but because the (large) constituency runs AT-bus machines and > bus structure is an important discriminator. But the Sun 386i *does* have an AT bus and can use AT cards. It's not the primary bus, true, but it's quite conceivable that certain types of 386i discussion would be at home... and it's not like the Sun and Sequent folks are going to flood the vast majority of 386 users. > comp.unix.at386 And the PS/2 people are running very similar UNIXes and don't have AT (or ISA) busses in them. They should certainly not be excluded. If the load grows too heavy, you can subdivide the group again. -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` Opinions may not represent the policies of FICC or the Xenix Support group.