On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 03:21:08PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Yes I don't think that'd be a problem. > > One last question and then I think I'll be satisfied. Is the opensolaris > project a complete fork from solaris? Just to make sure it makes sense > to use kopensolaris instead of ksolaris, but I guess the kernel's uname > output might be the definitive answer to that.
On OpenSolaris, uname says "SunOS", and config.guess makes "i386-pc-solaris2.11" from that. It would be foolish of them to change uname output or triplet for a system that has the same ABI. Though technically, AFAIK Solaris and OpenSolaris are not the same thing (I think it's similar to StarOffice and OpenOffice). And if we distribute a kernel it's certainly going to be the kernel of OpenSolaris and not the kernel of Solaris. I think it would be Fair Use of their trademarks to refer to it as the former, but I'm not sure about the latter. Then again, I doubt trademark stuff is very relevant when it comes to strings whose main purpose is to be parsed and only rarely read by a human. Not sure if this clarified the situation or made it even more confusing :-) I don't feel strongly about it either way, but I think the port authors should have a word on it. David, what do you think about all this? -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
