uname -a not providing Suse OS name and release info
Any reason "uname -a" on Suse 10.0 (intel) does not provide the name Suse Linux and 10.0 release information? Other versions of Linux and FreeBSD seem to provide the expected information on the distribution and its respective version.
From a developer point of view is there a reliable/consistent way to obtain Linux distribution name and release information?
Thank you, Frank -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, proprietary , confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and erase this e-mail message immediately. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Le present message electronique (y compris les pieces qui y sont annexees, le cas echeant) s'adresse au destinataire indique et peut contenir des renseignements de caractere prive ou confidentiel. Si vous n'etes pas le destinataire de ce document, nous vous signalons qu'il est strictement interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer ou de le reproduire. Si ce message vous a ete transmis par erreur, veuillez en informer l'expediteur et le supprimer immediatement. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote: ...
From a developer point of view is there a reliable/consistent way to obtain Linux distribution name and release information?
/etc/SuSE-release
/etc/redhat-release
/etc/mandrake-release
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 11:27:24PM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote: ...
From a developer point of view is there a reliable/consistent way to obtain Linux distribution name and release information?
/etc/SuSE-release /etc/redhat-release /etc/mandrake-release
I asume he wants to know a consistant way across Linux distributions. It would indeed be nice if there where something like /etc/release, even if it only were a symlink, on each and every Linux distro. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 houghi wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 11:27:24PM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote: ...
From a developer point of view is there a reliable/consistent way to obtain Linux distribution name and release information? /etc/SuSE-release /etc/redhat-release /etc/mandrake-release I asume he wants to know a consistant way across Linux distributions. It would indeed be nice if there where something like /etc/release, even if it only were a symlink, on each and every Linux distro.
Well, yes, it's more or less consistent ("more or less" because I'm not sure every distro ships such
a file).
You just have to probe for the existence of these files, and then parse their content.
Unfortunately, the format inside those files is different from one distro to the other.
But, well.. write and maintain it once. It's not the nicest way there could be, but it definately
works. At least on the distributions that include such a file.
The hard part is to collect the information on how that file is called with every distro you want to
support/detect, and then look into those files to see how they're built up. Then parse.
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 23:27 +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote: ...
From a developer point of view is there a reliable/consistent way to obtain Linux distribution name and release information?
/etc/SuSE-release /etc/redhat-release /etc/mandrake-release
How about every distribution just call it /etc/release or is that too easy? -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ken Schneider wrote:
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 23:27 +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote: ...
From a developer point of view is there a reliable/consistent way to obtain Linux distribution name and release information? /etc/SuSE-release /etc/redhat-release /etc/mandrake-release
How about every distribution just call it /etc/release or is that too easy?
It definately would be much too easy ;)
Well, it doesn't help. We could start with SUSE and ask the devs to include such a file, then talk
with Fedora, Mandriva, Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Knoppix, and a few dozen others.
It still wouldn't help.
Because the file is not included in past releases ;)
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:40:30AM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Well, it doesn't help. We could start with SUSE and ask the devs to include such a file, then talk with Fedora, Mandriva, Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Knoppix, and a few dozen others. It still wouldn't help. Because the file is not included in past releases ;)
It is on every LSB compliant system. Not as a file but as a tool. Just type "lsb_release -ir". Robert -- Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2214 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:rschiele@uni-mannheim.de
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Schiele wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:40:30AM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Well, it doesn't help. We could start with SUSE and ask the devs to include such a file, then talk with Fedora, Mandriva, Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Knoppix, and a few dozen others. It still wouldn't help. Because the file is not included in past releases ;)
It is on every LSB compliant system. Not as a file but as a tool. Just type "lsb_release -ir".
Thanks for the hint Robert.
One never stops learning ;)
As a side note, anyone knows what distributions are LSB-compliant (or at least have that lsb_release) ?
A list that would show what distro is LSB-compliant, and from what release on (and with what LSB
spec version), could be helpful.
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:00:47AM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
As a side note, anyone knows what distributions are LSB-compliant (or at least have that lsb_release) ? A list that would show what distro is LSB-compliant, and from what release on (and with what LSB spec version), could be helpful.
I have checked that at least from the mentioned versions on the following distributions have the script. I did not check earlier versions thus it does not mean that the mentioned version was the first to ship it. - SUSE: 9.0 - Fedora: 1 - Debian: 3.0 Robert -- Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2214 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:rschiele@uni-mannheim.de
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 12:04:55PM +0200, Robert Schiele wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:00:47AM +0200, Pascal Bleser wrote:
As a side note, anyone knows what distributions are LSB-compliant (or at least have that lsb_release) ? A list that would show what distro is LSB-compliant, and from what release on (and with what LSB spec version), could be helpful.
I have checked that at least from the mentioned versions on the following distributions have the script. I did not check earlier versions thus it does not mean that the mentioned version was the first to ship it.
- SUSE: 9.0
- Fedora: 1
- Debian: 3.0
I tried to find out on http://www.linuxbase.org/index.php and just saw, well nothing Pacticipants are netSweng, Intell and IBM, wich you only see if you do a refresh. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Howzit Frank? Works for me, try uname -r. Cheers Bruce On Monday 17 October 2005 22:10, Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote: uname -a
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 10:28:00PM +0100, DBA wrote:
Howzit Frank?
Works for me, try uname -r.
How does that tell me I am running SUSE? It says 2.6.13-15-smp with me and that could be anything. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 05:10:36PM -0400, Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote:
Any reason "uname -a" on Suse 10.0 (intel) does not provide the name Suse Linux and 10.0 release information? Other versions of Linux and FreeBSD seem to provide the expected information on the distribution and its respective version.
Just looked at the man page and it only talks about: kernel name, network node name, kernel release, kernel version, machine, processor, hardware platform and operating sustem. I do not see where it should give the expected SUSE version, other then naming the kernel SUSE_10.0. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
participants (6)
-
DBA -
Frank.Pikelner＠blue-dot.ca -
houghi -
Ken Schneider -
Pascal Bleser -
Robert Schiele