RE: [opensuse] uname -a not providing Suse OS name and release info
uname -r give back "2.6.13-15-default", I was expecting something like SuSE 10.0. I was looking ideally for something that works across all Linux distributions. Cheers, Frank -----Original Message----- From: DBA [mailto:DBA@williamson.net.au] Sent: October 17, 2005 5:28 PM To: opensuse@opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse] uname -a not providing Suse OS name and release info 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-help@opensuse.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank, On Monday 17 October 2005 15:16, Frank.Pikelner@blue-dot.ca wrote:
uname -r give back "2.6.13-15-default", I was expecting something like SuSE 10.0.
I was looking ideally for something that works across all Linux distributions.
Why? It's not wise to condition actions upon a "distribution" (whatever that is--it's a marketing term more than a technical one). If you have dependencies, then they must be represented as what they are: You require version >= x.y of package "foo" and version >= w.z && version <= q.r of package "bar," etc. These things are not fixed for a given distribution.
Cheers,
Frank
Randall Schulz
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 07:09:16PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Why? It's not wise to condition actions upon a "distribution" (whatever that is--it's a marketing term more than a technical one).
Tell that to the people who make the RPM packages. They keep telling that you should package for your distro. Now if there is a difference there, there will be more things that might be different. 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
Houghi, On Monday 17 October 2005 21:46, houghi wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 07:09:16PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Why? It's not wise to condition actions upon a "distribution" (whatever that is--it's a marketing term more than a technical one).
Tell that to the people who make the RPM packages. They keep telling that you should package for your distro. Now if there is a difference there, there will be more things that might be different.
I don't get what you're trying to say. RPMs are a bundle of software with multiple dependencies on the environment in which it executes. The way they're conventionally constituted is by configuring them for a particular set of dependent packages. Each distribution contains a different set of package (and / or package versions) and demands that software built for it accommodate that complement of packages (versions). That's not the same as software that, when executed, looks at the "distribution" and tries to adapt itself to it. It's this kind of behavior that I advise against. Either you pre-configure for a particular set of dependent package (which is more or less determined by a distribution and hence can be used to effect that pre-configuration) or the software must adapt to its _specific_ dependencies. An example of this is the way Kat configures itself by looking for the dependent programs it requires and operates within the limits of what is available. Note that it does _not_ look at the distribution, it looks for specific software it needs.
houghi
Randall Schulz
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 10:07:25PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
RPMs are a bundle of software with multiple dependencies on the environment in which it executes. The way they're conventionally constituted is by configuring them for a particular set of dependent packages. Each distribution contains a different set of package (and / or package versions) and demands that software built for it accommodate that complement of packages (versions).
So what you are saying is that each distro needs its own packaging. That is what I said. I just use less words. :-D
That's not the same as software that, when executed, looks at the "distribution" and tries to adapt itself to it. It's this kind of behavior that I advise against.
It is not the same, it is simmilar. I also did not say it was wise. ;-) 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
Houghi, On Monday 17 October 2005 23:21, houghi wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 10:07:25PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
RPMs are a bundle of software with multiple dependencies on the environment in which it executes. The way they're conventionally constituted is by configuring them for a particular set of dependent packages. Each distribution contains a different set of package (and / or package versions) and demands that software built for it accommodate that complement of packages (versions).
So what you are saying is that each distro needs its own packaging. That is what I said. I just use less words. :-D
That's not the same as software that, when executed, looks at the "distribution" and tries to adapt itself to it. It's this kind of behavior that I advise against.
It is not the same, it is similar. I also did not say it was wise. ;-)
Here's what you wrote: On Monday 17 October 2005 21:46, houghi wrote:
Tell that to the people who make the RPM packages. They keep telling that you should package for your distro. Now if there is a difference there, there will be more things that might be different.
What did you mean? I'm still not understanding your objection to what I originally wrote. The O.P. wanted a way to determine what distribution his code is _running on_. That's not really the same as _building_ a package for a particular distribution.
houghi
Randall Schulz
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 11:31:10PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
What did you mean? I'm still not understanding your objection to what I originally wrote.
I have no objection. It was implied by the person to whom I replied that there was (or should not be) no difference between distributions, to wich I replied in a sarcastic way to explain this to the RPM makers. As if the person would have said: children are never sick and I replied, tell that to my children. The latter is just an exaple as I have no children that I know of. 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
Randall R Schulz wrote:
its _specific_ dependencies. An example of this is the way Kat configures itself by looking for the dependent programs it requires and
LyX do the same and can accomodate alot of different backends this way jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
participants (4)
-
Frank.Pikelner＠blue-dot.ca -
houghi -
jdd -
Randall R Schulz