Re: [MTT users] Patch for whatami (new sles10 lsb-release fileformat)

On Mon, Jan/05/2009 07:36:06PM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > Ethan -- did we ever reply to Brian about this? > Oops. I did not. > Do you have any thoughts on the issue? My thought is that I definitely prefer the short string (rhel) to the new long one (RedHatEnterprise), and I'm less concerned about

Re: [MTT users] Patch for whatami (new sles10 lsb-release fileformat)

Ethan -- did we ever reply to Brian about this? Do you have any thoughts on the issue? On Nov 7, 2008, at 3:07 PM, Brian Elliott Finley wrote: Well, we don't want to be changing the results that folks are already relying on, but it looks like we are. The benefit in putting the lsb test at

Re: [MTT users] Patch for whatami (new sles10 lsb-release fileformat)

Well, we don't want to be changing the results that folks are already relying on, but it looks like we are. The benefit in putting the lsb test at the top is that most new and future distros can be identified by that. But, it looks like the safest thing to do is to put it at the bottom.

Re: [MTT users] Patch for whatami (new sles10 lsb-release fileformat)

Thanks Brian. Ethan -- if it works for you, can you pull down a new version and commit to MTT's SVN? On Nov 6, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Brian Elliott Finley wrote: All, I've committed a new version that includes the version referenced below, and changed the $() to ``. Cheers, -Brian Tim

Re: [MTT users] Patch for whatami (new sles10 lsb-release fileformat)

All, I've committed a new version that includes the version referenced below, and changed the $() to ``. Cheers, -Brian Tim Mattox wrote: > The 2008.10.31 version that Jeff forwarded works fine on SLES9 PPC64. > > 2008/10/31 Jeff Squyres : >> Sorry; my stupid mailer didn't