I think that would be a good idea.. I'm surprised the configure script checks /proc/cpuinfo for exactly the reasons you state.
I would certainly support such a patch, but I don't have commit bits, so I can't guarantee anything. -derek Kris Van Hees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Currently, the support for UML (User Mode Linux) depends on it being compiled > on UML itself, because it detects the host using information in /proc/cpuinfo. > That of course causes an issue if you would want to do the actual compilation > on another Linux system (a real one, not UML) for performance reasons or just > to centralize your compilations. OpenAFS offers the --with-linux-kernel-headers > option to configure to (possibly) compile against a Linux source tree that is > not identical to the host the compilation is running on. > > So the question is... Do you think that it would be better to have the code > in configure for detecting the appropriate sysname use the information found in > the Linux kernel headers (look for CONFIG_USERMODE set to 1 in <autoconf.h>) > rather than the current check on /proc/cpuinfo? > > My guess would be a resounding 'YES' for using the kernel headers, but I'd like > to confirm that before sending in a patch for it :) > > Kris > -- > Never underestimate a Mage with: > - the Intelligence to cast Magic Missile, > - the Constitution to survive the first hit, and > - the Dexterity to run fast enough to avoid being hit a second time. > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
