Messages in this thread | | | From | Peter Chubb <> | Date | Mon, 13 Mar 2000 09:01:41 +1100 (EST) | Subject | Re: ver_linux script |
| |
>>>>> "Brandon" == Brandon S Allbery KF8NH <allbery@kf8nh.apk.net> writes:
In message <20000309193913.A1056@niksula.cs.hut.fi>, Ville Herva writes: +----- | On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 10:09:25AM -0500, you [Tim Coleman] claimed: | > On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 06:35:18PM +0200, Ville Herva wrote: | > > Perhaps "uname -a" in linux_ver script should changed to | > > "cat /proc/version"? | > | > Or maybe uname should be changed to include the compiler? | | Sounds good unless there are some kind of unix standard issues on what | uname should return. +--->8
Brandon> If there are, nobody follows them....
The Posix.1 spec is quite specific on what uname(2) must return: sysname (name of the inmplementation of the OS, i.e., Linux), nodename (same as hostname), release, version and machine-hardware-type.
The uname(1) command specifies -[amnsrv] but I can see no reason why additional information can't be added.
For one thing, `version' of a release could contain the compiler ID (POsix doesn't specify what goes into that string); or a new interface (via sysconf maybe) could be added to get the information, and a new option to uname to print it out.
Peter C
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |