[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freebsd-hackers
Subject:    Re: uname -a/uname -v broken (or not?)
From:       Peter da Silva <peter () bonkers ! taronga ! com>
Date:       1994-12-31 2:16:57
[Download RAW message or body]

> The man page claims that uname is  POSIX conforming - can someone check 
> IEE Std1003.2 to see if we've broken this....

Wasn't there a big flame war about this, whether scripts should be parsing
this information and whether POSIX required it to be parsable and whether
anyone was doing anyone a favor by encouraging them to depend on the format
of uname -a when it wasn't guaranteed on other platforms and so on?

Was that on the NetBSD list, maybe? I forget.

MHO: uname should be useful as well as POSIX-conforming, and should output
space-separated tokens that do not contain spaces.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]