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

Re: Version & Distribution identification



On Wed, May 24, 2000 at 01:06:48PM +1000, cyeoh@linuxcare.com.au wrote:
> >> Is it necessary to also specify a C library api for the above?
> >Adding a binary in /bin bloats the root partition needlessly (we're
> >talking at least, what, 3k these days for nop.c?), pollutes a namespace
> >it doesn't need to, and is generally just nuts.
> For the type of systems that the LSB is aimed at, is this really a big
> issue?

"the type of systems" ? Linux systems aren't just for the desktop...

> Running `lsb_release -i' would be a whole lot easier than searching
> around for /etc/debian_version, /etc/redhat-release, /etc/SuSe-release
> etc...

So would be parsing /etc/lsb-version as was being discussed
earlier. For that matter, so would be running /usr/bin/lsb_release, or
/usr/lib/lsb/bin/release. Parsing a file strikes me as easier to handle
than parsing the output of a command, in particular.

Note that the comparison to uname doesn't really apply, since C programs
have a uname() system call they can make.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

  ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
                 We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
                                      -- Dave Clark

Attachment: pgpBJLbZZQ1re.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: