why comp.unix.{segment,linear} won't work

[Paul Vixie]

In article <272 at hawkmoon.MN.ORG> det at hawkmoon.MN.ORG (Derek E. Terveer) writes:
# I have to agree.  Since there seems to be a division between the 80x86
# architecture and "other" (linear) architectures, regardless of merit, we could
# really come up with two types of Unix groups:
# 
# 	comp.unix.segment	(or comp.unix.seg)
# 	comp.unix.linear	(or comp.unix.lin)
# 
# Obviously, the 80x86 CPUs would inhabit the segmented unix groups [...]

I'm sure it's too late to ward off the flame war, but I'll try.

The 80386 is arguably a linear-addressed chip, in native mode.  It has
pages, and the segments can be made large enough to be invisible.  Perhaps
the segments can even be turned off, I don't remember.

But this split won't work.  Some CPUs are neither segmented nor linear, or
they're both.  I could see a small amount of merit in {paged,swapped}, but
even there the distinction blurs on some CPUs.

Besides, I don't want people to have to know whether their machine is paged
or swapped or segmented or linear before they can post to the net.  I don't
want to see an endless chain of discussion as to what segmentation means.
I don't want to see the endless arguments about whether a given CPU is or
is not linearly addressed.

Choosing a newsgroup name is a political, not a technical process.
-- 
Paul Vixie
Digital Equipment Corporation	Work:  vixie at dec.com	Play:  paul at vixie.UUCP
Western Research Laboratory	 uunet!decwrl!vixie	   uunet!vixie!paul
Palo Alto, California, USA	  +1 415 853 6600	   +1 415 864 7013