🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <14u80dINNbda@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr>, Christophe.Wolfhugel@univ-lyon1.fr (Christophe Wolfhugel) writes:
> mark@infocomm.com writes:
>> How about having some discussions about VMS Posix in the main stream
>> heirarchies
> 
> Some discussion has already taken place a while ago in news.groups
> about the creation of Posix group(s).  comp.unix.posix, etc...
> 
> It did obviously not lead to any solution, some contributors
> brought as an argument that Posix is too close to Unix to need
> separate groups (they're not wrong, both are really close).
> 

I disagree to a point here - if a user logs into the POSIX shell and never
touches DCL or VMS library functions, this is true, but a VMSNET.POSIX for the
discussion of VMS Posix, and how to interoperate between VMS and VMS Posix
(i.e. calling shell from DCL, DCL from shell, file name string scan hints and
kings, etc) would not be appropriate in the comp.unix heiarchy - in fact many
comp.unix folks may be offended by the mere presense of VMS'ers asking a bunch
of questions that are "irrelavent to a real UN*X system."

My vote would be for a VMSNET.POSIX, even if the traffic doesn't warrant it, it
would announce the category of questions, and may get more specific readership.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrence Fisher                      Realtime Software Specialist
Fisher@HIGHD.ENET.DEC.COM            Digital Equipment Corporation
                                     Ridgecrest, CA
*   This message reflects my own views/opinions, not those of my company    *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------