uname output ?

[Paul Iadonisi]

On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 15:29, pll at lanminds.com wrote:

[snip]

> >In a way, this is a good thing.  However it will annoy me to no end if
> >the different distributions do not customize this field to reflect the
> >distribution in use.
> 
> Or, if the customize for each release such that a generic shell 
> script fails to be able to recognize future releases.  Imagine if 
> 'uname -o' on different Red Hat systems reported:
> 
> 	fisher
> 	limbo
> 	lorax
> 	mustang
> 	pensacola
> 	piglet
> 	pinstripe
> 	rembrandt
> 	starbuck
> 	thunderbird
> 	wolverine
> 
> at different times?  And I fear that this is what will happen. RH 
> will place the release name or number in that field, and not mention 
> RedHat.  Debian is going with GNU/Linux (for now), but what if they 
> decided to go the same route, such that different systems could 
> report:
> 
> 	slink
> 	potato
> 	woody
> 	sarge
> 	sid
> 
> Could happen, and I'd find that quite annoying.

  I wouldn't worry about it.  I would summarily ignore the 'uname -o'
functionality (if it can even be called that).  Someone just pointed out
'lsb_release -d' to me.  Using 'lsb_release -a' or 'lsb_release -as' you
can get all the distribution specific information you'll probably ever
need.

va:iadonisi:1297) lsb_release -d
Description:	Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla)
va:iadonisi:1298) lsb_release -a
LSB Version:	1.2.0
Distributor ID:	RedHat
Description:	Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla)
Release:	7.3
Codename:	Valhalla
va:iadonisi:1299) lsb_release -as
1.2.0 RedHat "Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla)" 7.3 Valhalla

-- 
-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets