why comp.unix.{segment,linear} won't work

[Barnacle Wes]

In article <272 at hawkmoon.MN.ORG> det at hawkmoon.MN.ORG (Derek E. Terveer) writes:
# ..., we could
# really come up with two types of Unix groups:
# 	comp.unix.segment	(or comp.unix.seg)
# 	comp.unix.linear	(or comp.unix.lin)

In article <83 at volition.dec.com>, vixie at decwrl.dec.com (Paul Vixie) writes:
> The 80386 is arguably a linear-addressed chip, in native mode.  It has
> pages, and the segments can be made large enough to be invisible.  Perhaps
> the segments can even be turned off, I don't remember.
> 
> But this split won't work.  Some CPUs are neither segmented nor linear, or
> they're both.  I could see a small amount of merit in {paged,swapped}, but
> even there the distinction blurs on some CPUs.

OK, so let's really do it right:

	comp.unix.segmented.swapped.byte-backwards	(i.e. 286)
	comp.unix.segmented.paged.byte-backwards	(i.e. 386)
	comp.unix.linear.paged.byte-backwards		(i.e. VAX)
	comp.unix.bank-selected.swapped.byte-backwards	(i.e. PDP)
	comp.unix.linear.swapped.sensible-addresses	(i.e. 68K)
	comp.unix.linear.paged.sensible-addresses	(i.e. 68020, 030)
	comp.os.minix.wimps				(for PCs and clones)
	comp.os.minix.real				(for STs and such)

The 286 and 386 are very different processors, and the OSs for them are
very different, too.  comp.unix.microport was formed for Microport
users, leave it alone.  Xenix is a half-breed bastard, let their users
have their own little corner.  So we have:

	comp.unix.i286		Unix systems on the 286 processor
	comp.unix.i386		Unix systems on the 386 processor
	comp.unix.microport	For Microport owners/users
	comp.unix.xenix		For SCO/Microsoft/etc. owners/users
-- 
                     {hpda, uwmcsd1}!sp7040!obie!wes
           "Happiness lies in being priviledged to work hard for
           long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing."
                         -- Robert A. Heinlein --