OUPS (was: PUPS and BUPS (burp!) thoughts.....)
msokolov at blackwidow.SOML.CWRU.Edu
Fri Jul 31 20:09:02 AEST 1998
Warren Toomey <wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> wrote:
> I don't know, I thought that it would give people more flexibility,
> and shield people from stuff they didn't want to see. So lets ask:
> If you're on the PUPS list, do you want to see stuff about non PDP-11 Unixes?
> If you're on the BUPS list, do you want to see stuff about PDP-11 Unixes.
Personally, I think it's a bad idea to have two separate societies/lists. After
all, in many case PDP-11 UNIX and VAX UNIX are the same code compiled for
different CPUs, and these lists are not about binary-only OSes, are they?
If it's all fundamentally the same code, it should be on one list, regardless
of what CPUs people want to compile it for.
I'm also a little troubled by the word "preservation". This word suggests the
group acknowledges that these systems are "old" or "historical". 4.3BSD is
being _ACTIVELY WORKED ON_ (by me) as I type, and I have been under the
impression that 2.11BSD is also being actively worked on by Steven M. Schults.
Sure, these systems WILL be "old" or "historical" if we just sit and "preserve"
them, but IMHO this is NOT what we should do. We should look and act and behave
AS IF these systems were brand new. I.e, run them in production on the net
competing with Pentiums and SPARCs, and actually MAKE thse systems new by doing
active development work on the sources just like the dev teams for "new" OSes
do. If we can't build a time machine, let's shut all doors and windows and
create a 1980s world inside!
So, with these ideas in mind, why not call ourselves TUUDS, True UNIX User and
Received: (from major at localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA02203
for pups-liszt; Fri, 31 Jul 1998 21:13:34 +1000 (EST)
More information about the TUHS