From: veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de (Holger Veit)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386bsd -- The New Newsgroup
Date: 10 Sep 92 06:52:03 GMT
Organization: Uni-Duisburg FB9 Datenverarbeitung
Reply-To: veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de
Keywords: newsgroup 386bsd news group

In <18lkkkINN14d@agate.berkeley.edu> wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes:

>In article <veit.716026274@du9ds3> veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de writes:
>>>>
>>>>As per Bill's suggestion, here's a breakdown of some of the suggested 
>>>>topics and groups:
>>>>
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd		(general questions and trivia)
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd.kernel	(discussion on kernel content/structure)
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd.windows	(ditto, on windowing systems like X)
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd.sharedlib (shared library and programming environment)
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd.net	(networking topics)
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd.bugs	(new bugs)
>>>>	comp.os.386bsd.ann	(announcements, fixes, additions)

>>We have considerably high traffic on 'I cannot boot with my configuration', say
>>'newbie' stuff. 
[...]
>Newbies post to the general comp.os.386bsd of course. Pretty simple.

>>I haven't seen much on shared libraries yet in this group, so why sharedlib...

>The subgroups kernel, windows, sharedlib (for shared libraries, Holger) and
>net (for networking) are actually research/development topics, and have 
>been of intense interest to those who wish to participate in developing 
>these areas further.

Oh, it's not that I do not understand the intention of these different 
groups, my comment (and this was why I mentioned the "newbie") is that not
everyone will directly recognize the main topics. In particular *.ann is 
called *.announce in other subtrees, however, the topics do not necessarily
include "fixes, additions" (cf. gnu.announce)

>Please remember, 386BSD is not a commercial system, but intended to facilitate
>research and educational inquiry on new work and new paradigms. It is hoped
>that all of those people who have written me asking to be part of these
>projects will be able to actually aid/formulate newer models of thought.

I have always seen 386BSD as a non-profit, research, and educational system,
and I strongly advocate that it won't go the BSDI way ;-(.

>For example, shared libraries are quite easy to "hack in" (just look at
>Linux), and for some systems that is probably the best approach -- just
>get it in there and going. However, there are several considerations that
>must be dealt with before putting in such a feature. Expedient approaches
>can result in a long-time legacy that is difficult to support and even
>impedes new progress in related areas.

Currently I'm still "hacking" at pccons (will be called "co"nsole driver next),
but my next goal is quite clear: I want to have the disk space back that is
currently used by statically linked X apps (=> shared libs). We should talk 
about that in another *thread*. I admit that others might have opinions 
on the implementation different than mine, but I don't see - for now! - 
that this justifies its own subgroup. I may be wrong, of course, in the 
long term, but the group comp.os.386bsd to come may evolve as well as the 
OS itself.

>Once we get these groups rolling, I don't think it will be difficult to
>differentiate.

I agree, with a slight modification:

Once we get a main group comp.os.386bsd rolling, I don't think it will be 
difficult to differentiate.

>Lynne Jolitz.

Holger
-- 
|  |   / Dr. Holger Veit         | INTERNET: veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de
|__|  /  University of Duisburg  | BITNET: veit%du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de@UNIDO
|  | /   Dept. of Electr. Eng.   | "No, my programs are not BUGGY, these are
|  |/    Inst. f. Dataprocessing |          just unexpected FEATURES"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd