Robert Millan wrote: > Paul Eggert wrote: > > I dunno, that patch looks a little weird to me, as it causes "-a" to > > behave non-orthogonally with respect to the -o option (i.e., -o is > > treated differently from -s/-n/-r/-v/-m/-p/-i). Also, I suppose it > > might break some software that parses "uname -a" output (any such > > software is unportable, but we'd rather not break it anyway...). > > > > What's the motivation for the change? > > In Debian, "uname -a" is executed by login right after authenticating.
Huh? Where is this printed? Not in the standard system login scripts. But perhaps in a user's personal environment scripts. I tend to do that myself. But it is a personal choice, not a system choice. I am running both Debian woody and sid on various machines. > In GNU/kFreeBSD systems, `uname -s` output is equal to `uname -o`. Therefore > everytime you login in Debian GNU/kFreeBSD it prints the same information > twice, making the string look redundant and longer. Basically uname is terribly non-portable. The only safe result is the one without any options. I am sure you will have run into the many cases where this prints radically different styles of information on different machines. So I always do something like this: case $(uname) in HP-UX) echo $(uname -rs) $(model) ;; # HP-UX B.11.11 9000/785/C3750 Linux) uname -ms ;; # Linux ia64 AIX) echo $(uname) $(uname -v).$(uname -r) ;; # AIX 4.3 esac Bob _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
