[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: inconsistent "uname -s" option

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: inconsistent "uname -s" option
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:11:51 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 02:51:37PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I don't see why this proposed change is needed.

Actualy, i think your proposed change looks more reasonable than mine. I
have some comments though.

> On many systems, it happens to be that the kernel name is the same as
> the operating system name, but this doesn't mean we should confuse the
> two notions on all systems.

well I don't exactly agree with this, but i think we can avoid discussing
wether it's correct to call a kernel after the OS, since uname is merely
forwarding information from the kernel and is not really responsible for
its "correctness".

I'd like to propose this minor change:

> +differ.  Some operating systems (e.g., FreeBSD, HP-UX) have the same
> +name as their underlying kernels; others (e.g., GNU/Linux, Solaris)
> +do not.

  "Some kernels (e.g., FreeBSD's, HP-UX's) report the same name as their
  overlying operating systems; others (e.g., Linux, SunOS) do not."

This way we are saying that the kernel "reports" that name, but we don't
claim that the name is correct. It's left at the readers' discretion to
decide wether the kernel really has that name or not.

Robert Millan

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]