From owner-freebsd-afs Mon Dec 15 09:45:24 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA17484 for afs-outgoing; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:45:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-afs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail1.its.rpi.edu (root@mail1.its.rpi.edu [128.113.100.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17477 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:45:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gad@mlor.its.rpi.edu) Received: from mlor.its.rpi.edu (mlor.its.rpi.edu [128.113.24.92]) by mail1.its.rpi.edu (8.8.8/8.8.6) with SMTP id MAA50152; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 12:45:05 -0500 Received: by mlor.its.rpi.edu (NX5.67f2/NX3.0M) id AA11405; Mon, 15 Dec 97 13:11:18 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Dec 97 13:11:18 -0500 From: Garance A Drosehn Message-Id: <9712151811.AA11405@mlor.its.rpi.edu> To: dec@phoenix.its.rpi.edu, loverso@opengroup.org Subject: Re: What to call ourselves? Cc: freebsd-afs@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-afs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk John Robert LoVerso writes: > Sys names have historically been "arch_system". I.e., See this (dated, but > accurate) file: /afs/transarc.com/service/systypes > > We've already been using "i386_fbsd21" and "i386_fbsd22" (see > /afs/ri.osf.org/vice/i386_fbsd21). I suggest you stick with that format. > > Note that "i386" is (unfortunately) generic for the Intel family and is used > as such in many other PC-UNIX ports (i386_linux2 and i386_nbsd1, for instance). This seems like the right naming conventions to me, too. --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer (MIME & NeXTmail capable) Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy NY USA