Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 14:37:48 +1000 From: David Dawes <dawes@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Determining FreeBSD versions Message-ID: <19970702143748.33147@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <E0wj4vd-0006AC-00@rover.village.org>; from Warner Losh on Tue, Jul 01, 1997 at 09:33:17AM -0600 References: <19970701190353.50830@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> <E0wj4vd-0006AC-00@rover.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 01, 1997 at 09:33:17AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >In message <19970701190353.50830@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> David Dawes writes: >: branch, and as a consequence, 'uname -r' now reports "2.1-STABLE" rather > >Hmmm. Why not report 2.1.x-STABLE? Where x is incremented whenever a >release happens. Then people know that things are newer than 2.1.x or >2.2.x or whatever. Agreed. >I'm not completely sure that parsing osversion.h (or is that >osreldate.h) is the right answer here. I've ended up getting imake to look at the kern.osreldate sysctl value when it can't determine the dot revision from the uname -r output. At least then both methods are consistent in that they are getting the version information from the kernel. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970702143748.33147>