On Sat, 20 May 2006 16:53:27 +0200 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> wrote:
> > > Why do you believe that /usr/bin/uname is not POSIX compliant? > > > > Let me re-phrase that statement: "... a cheap way to get a version of > > 'uname' into that directory which does not have Solaris-specific > > extensions (e.g. allows the creation of portable scripts without the > > risk of falling into the 'OS-specific-extension'-trap again)". Better ? > > :-) > But you then still ignore the fact that /usr/bin/uname is POSIX compliant on > Solaris. that confustion was fueled by me other replies pointed out that posix allows the solaris-specific uname extensions we've updated uname to match the gnu extensions for uname -a and hope to post beta source this week
