Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
> Declan Moriarty, Jun 21, 11:28 +0100:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ uname -a Linux genius 2.4.22 #1 Fri Apr 15
> >15:29:56 IST 2005 i686 AuthenticAMD unknown GNU/Linux
>
> >How come uname doesn't know this is an LFS box?
>
> \quote
>
> 6.15.1. Installation of Coreutils
>
> A known issue with the uname program from this package is that the -p
> switch always returns unknown. The following patch fixes this behavior
> for Intel architectures:
>
> patch -Np1 -i ../coreutils-5.2.1-uname-2.patch
>
> \endquote
>
>
> Why this doesn't seem to work on your machine is a good question...
>
I dunno. It's a while since I started it and it certainly is not current
and was built off a (much) earlier book.
I have memories of a patch to coreutils which didn't 'do what it said on
the tin' as the advertising phrase is. My lfs book (LFS-BOOK-5.0-PRE2)
says this in chapter 06
----------------
Installation of Coreutils
Normally the functionality of uname is somewhat broken, in that the
-p switch always
returns "unknown". The following patch fixes this behaviour for Intel
architectures:
patch -Np1 -i ../coreutils-5.0-uname.patch
We do not want Coreutils to install its version of the hostname
program, because it is
inferior to the version provided by Net-tools. Prevent its
installation by applying a
patch:
patch -Np1 -i ../coreutils-5.0-hostname-2.patch
----------------
I presumed the thing remained broken because I am running AMD, not
intel.
So much for the post mortem. Is coreutils system critical or can I
update it without freaking things?
--
With best Regards,
Declan Moriarty.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
