John Jolet wrote:
While we're at it, could people get a clue and stop including moronic
little tags in their email like:
this is required by many companies legal departments. Some places even add it
at the mta, not the client.
No, it is not required by ALL, or even
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are writing remote systems management software for Linux systems and
are looking for a standard way to obtain a remote systems distribution
name and release version. The “lsb_release –ir” commands seems to
provide what we are looking for and works under a number of
it sounds like one of the Linux Standard Base stuff... you won't see it
at gentoo in any time soon i guess
On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 10:41 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are writing remote systems management software for Linux systems
and are looking for a standard way to obtain a remote systems
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 17:36, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you cat /etc/gentoo-release it give back Gentoo Base System
version 1.4.16.
Though being LSB compliant may not make sense for Gentoo as a whole,
there is sense in having an ability to remotely identify the system as a
Gentoo
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 17:36, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you cat /etc/gentoo-release it give back Gentoo Base System
version 1.4.16.
Though being LSB compliant may not make sense for Gentoo as a whole,
there is sense in having an ability to remotely identify the system
as a
Gentoo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Also from a system administrators point of view it is helpful to know
the operating system running on a particular server if you are
responsible for managing a diverse environment with thousands of
systems.
I'd check for the existence of emerge and/or
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:41:32 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| We are writing remote systems management software for Linux systems
| and are looking for a standard way to obtain a remote systems
| distribution name and release version. The lsb_release -ir commands
| seems to provide what we are
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:41:32 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| We are writing remote systems management software for Linux systems
| and are looking for a standard way to obtain a remote systems
| distribution name and release version. The lsb_release -ir commands
| seems
We are writing remote systems management software for Linux
systems and are looking for a standard way to obtain a remote systems
distribution name and release version.
Well, there isn't a standard way to any distro, come to think about it.
LSB is sort of a pain and one sided, based on their
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 14:25:07 -0400 Scott Stoddard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| An easy, distro-independent, method for determining what distro,
| version, release, toolchain versioning, and/or portage timestamp can
| only help maintainers of heterogenous networks to do their jobs with
| less
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 02:20 pm, Phill MV wrote:
We are writing remote systems management software for Linux systems and
are looking for a standard way to obtain a remote systems distribution name
and release version.
Well, there isn't a standard way to any distro, come to think about it.
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 02:25 pm, Scott Stoddard wrote:
An easy, distro-independent, method for determining what distro,
version, release, toolchain versioning, and/or portage timestamp can
only help maintainers of heterogenous networks to do their jobs with
less frustration.
Come on,
Scott Stoddard said:
Look I'm not at all suggesting that we dignify LSB but what the o.p.
is suggesting is not at all a bad idea.
An easy, distro-independent, method for determining what distro,
version, release, toolchain versioning, and/or portage timestamp can
only help maintainers of
this is required by many companies legal departments.Some places even add itat the mta, not the client.
:\ that sucks.
That just leaves me with one question: is it really legally binding? Is
it actually forseeable that someone might give me a hard time for say
posting such an email verbatim on a
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 08:32 pm, Phill MV wrote:
That just leaves me with one question: is it really legally binding? Is it
actually forseeable that someone might give me a hard time for say posting
such an email verbatim on a website?
Legally binding, maybe But enforcable, hardly. Had
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 20:32:03 -0400 Phill MV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| :\ that sucks.
| That just leaves me with one question: is it really legally binding?
| Is it actually forseeable that someone might give me a hard time for
| say posting such an email verbatim on a website?
Well... UK
Legally binding, maybeBut enforcable, hardly.Had the individual mailed youdirectly and you published it to the web, then you would have been violating
the original intent of the sender, to establish a protected conversationbetween the two of you (or, from the company's perspective, to
On Wednesday 19 October 2005 12:09 am, Phill MV wrote:
Well, it's just weird. What if said person is engaging in harassment?
That's a separate can of worms altogether. First you'd have to prove to the
court that you are actually getting harrassed. A statement like the one
automagically
18 matches
Mail list logo
