jeffh@weycord.WEYCO.COM (05/26/88)
How about a new subject:
comp.os.osf
-and/or-
comp.std.osf
I'm glad to see some REAL direction in a standard...
Jeff Harrell
hpubvwa!weycord!jeffh
(206) 927-9268stan@sdba.UUCP (Stan Brown) (05/31/88)
> > How about a new subject: > > comp.os.osf > -and/or- > comp.std.osf > > > I'm glad to see some REAL direction in a standard... > > > Jeff Harrell > hpubvwa!weycord!jeffh > (206) 927-9268 well if you are serious it should be: comp.unix.osf or are you trying to sya that osf has no relationship to UNIX(tm) ? stan -- Stan Brown S. D. Brown & Associates 404-292-9497 (uunet gatech)!sdba!stan "vi forever"
mdorion@cmtl01.UUCP (Mario Dorion) (06/03/88)
In article <5610001@weycord.WEYCO.COM>, jeffh@weycord.WEYCO.COM writes: > > How about a new subject: > comp.os.osf > -and/or- > comp.std.osf > I approve. Or maybe just even comp.unix.d This OSF discussion (though interesting) has no business in comp.unix.wizards -- Mario Dorion | ...!{rutgers,uunet,ihnp4}! Frisco Bay Industries | philabs!micomvax!cmtl01!mdorion Montreal, Canada | 1 (514) 738-7300 | I thought this planet was in public domain!