On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:21:00AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 08:26:37AM +0200, Steffen Grunewald wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 11:11:06AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> >>Well, that's a mistake on their part, assuming distribution-specific
> >>output from a standard
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 08:26:37AM +0200, Steffen Grunewald wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 11:11:06AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
Well, that's a mistake on their part, assuming distribution-specific
output from a standard tool.
well, it might be. But the result is that under Debian the instal
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 02:09:07PM +0200, Steffen Grunewald wrote:
OK, I see the point to some amount at least. Still I'm wondering why
we do not fill in something more useful than "unknown" - the processor
type is not completely unknown to us admitted that this info is already
in the machine typ
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 11:11:06AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 09:04:29AM +0200, you wrote:
> >Recent Globus (www.globus.org) build scripts check for the output of
> >"uname -p"
> >(or Python's platform.processor() which is based on that value) to
> >determine
> >the pla
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 09:04:29AM +0200, you wrote:
Recent Globus (www.globus.org) build scripts check for the output of "uname -p"
(or Python's platform.processor() which is based on that value) to determine
the platform the build is intented for, resulting in an incorrect build (mixed
32/64 bi
Package: coreutils
Version: 5.97-5.3
Followup-For: Bug #193170
Although #193170 has been marked FIXED, the Etch version still returns "unknown"
for "uname -p" - both on a 32bit i686 "uname -m" and a 64bit x86_64.
Recent Globus (www.globus.org) build scripts check for the output of "uname -p"
(or P
6 matches
Mail list logo
