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