On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 04:17:16PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> Just checked, and I was a little off. We don't actually do this in the
> kernel, we override it in the environment UNAME_ variables. All of our
> software that wants to look at the machine arch uses uname to do it,
> so we go that route. That way, we're not really lying to anything that
> wants to get the definitive answer from the hw.machine architecture.
> I can't defend it any further than that, maybe Peter or Paul or John
> can comment on it. I personally don't see one way as being better than
> the other, as they both have potential problems. As you noted in your
> previous email, it's an easy change that could have been done long ago;
> maybe the fact that it hasn't points to a good reason not to.
I know about environment variables affecting uname output, and use
it if possible. Unfortunately, there are some situations where environment
not propagated to the childs, or explicitely cleaned, e.g. sudo without
-E. Or, it is hard to establish environment at the first place.

I plan to commit it tomorrow.
> Scott
> On Jul 19, 2010, at 3:57 PM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 03:52:31PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> >> We do something similar at yahoo, and it's code that we're working
> >> on packaging up to put back into FreeBSD. I don't know how your code
> >> differs from ours, and I obviously cannot stop you from committing
> >> yours, but you're welcome to look at our code.
> > There is obviously no rush to commit this snippet, and I obviously would
> > abstain if this would make larger integration harder.
> > 
> > Where to look ? Or should I just sit and wait ?

Attachment: pgpMzu9Ro73wH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to