Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!lsuc!jimomura
From: jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura)
Newsgroups: net.micro.68k,net.news.group,net.micro.6809
Subject: Re: Can the OS-9 traffic move out of net.micro.68K?
Message-ID: <914@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Nov-85 11:31:35 EST
Article-I.D.: lsuc.914
Posted: Thu Nov 14 11:31:35 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 14-Nov-85 14:15:55 EST
References: <5100002@umn-cs.UUCP> <257@l5.uucp>
Reply-To: jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura)
Organization: Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto
Lines: 31
Xref: utcs net.micro.68k:1303 net.news.group:4335 net.micro.6809:582
Summary: Can't Agree

In article <257@l5.uucp> gnu@l5.uucp (John Gilmore) writes:
>Like the Mormons of eld, the OS-9 contingent keeps finding new homes
>on the Usenet and then being chased out.  I'd like to chase them out
>of net.micro.68k.  OS-9 doesn't have a lot to do with 68k's; you might
>as well post Unix-related messages in net.micro.68k too, right?
>
>I'd suggest "net.micro" since it seems to be a micro operating system
>and runs on many machines.
>
>You are welcome to petition for your own newsgroup, if you want.
>(net.micro.os-9?)  There certainly seems to be "enough traffic clogging
>existing groups" to warrant one.


     No.  You have no point in your submission at all.  OS-9 runs on
680xx processors.  In fact, the whole point here is that it's likely
one of the most useful tools you'll ever have on the 680xx world.  It
is one of the only possibilities for tying the whole mess together.

     If you don't know that, then you don't know 68000.

                                          Cheers! -- Jim O.

P.S.:  Welcome to the argument :-)

-- 
James Omura, Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto
ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
Compuserve: 72205,541
MTS at WU: GKL6