lawitzke@msudoc.UUCP (03/31/87)
I vote for comp.os.gnu. Somebody start the process running. -- John H. Lawitzke UUCP ...ihnp4!msudoc!eecae!lawitzke Division of Engineering Research Michigan State University Office: (517) 355-3769 E. Lansing, MI, 48824 Home: (517) 332-3610
mark@cogent.UUCP (04/02/87)
In article <1311@msudoc.UUCP> lawitzke@msudoc.UUCP (John Lawitzke) writes: >I vote for comp.os.gnu. Somebody start the process running. I agree. while some emacs discussions might justify cross-posting to both groups, there are many other cases where two seperate groups would be a more ideal situation. MicroEmacs users on PCs might not care much about, say, bison, and visa versa. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mark Steven Jeghers: the terrorist smuggling CIA weapons to Libya | | | | {ihnp4,cbosgd,lll-lcc,lll-crg}|{dual,ptsfa}!cogent!mark | | | | Standard Disclaimer: Contents may have settled during shipment. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
pekka-r@obelix.UUCP (04/04/87)
In article <1311@msudoc.UUCP> lawitzke@msudoc.UUCP (John Lawitzke) writes: >I vote for comp.os.gnu. Somebody start the process running. Me too. BTW excellent idea. I wote for comp.lang.gcc too. I would read every little article in those groups! [The Midnight Hacker Strikes Again] ******************************************************************************* UUCP: pekka-r@obelix.uucp | {seismo,mcvax}!enea!liuida!obelix!pekka-r ARPA: pekka-r%obelix.{ida.liu.se,UUCP}@seismo.CSS.GOV Pekka Akselin, Univ. of Linkoping, Sweden (The Land Of The Midnight Hacker :-)) *******************************************************************************
jv@mhres.UUCP (04/06/87)
I vote for comp.os.gnu
--
Johan Vromans @ Multihouse Research, Gouda, the Netherlands
usenet: ..{seismo!}mcvax!mhres!jvandersa@kuling.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <944@obelix.UUCP> pekka-r@obelix.UUCP (Pekka Akselin) writes: >I wote for comp.lang.gcc too. Hmm, I've got the impression that gcc is a C *compiler*, not a new *language*, right? Thus I think your suggestion for a name is a little inappropriate. Maybe comp.compilers.gcc (there is a mod.compilers.* tree right now), comp.os.gnu.gcc or *perhaps* comp.lang.c.gcc? Anyway, let's take one group at a time. When gcc details start to clobber up either comp.lang.c or comp.os.gnu, then it's time to think of creating a subgroup. -- Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University, Sweden Phone: +46 18 183170 UUCP: andersa@kuling.UUCP (...!{seismo,mcvax}!enea!kuling!andersa)