The right name for the 386 unix group

[Peter da Silva]

I said I wouldn't get involved in this. I lied. The bus is a red herring.

In article <ek3ic#1KMWg0=eric at snark.uu.net>, eric at 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 at ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180.   `-_-'
Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter at sugar.uu.net.                 'U`
Opinions may not represent the policies of FICC or the Xenix Support group.