From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 10 07:27:24 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA05950 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 07:27:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from geek.grf.ov.com (geek.grf.ov.com [192.251.86.19]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA05922 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 07:27:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ksmm@threespace.com) Received: from pebbles (pebbles.cam.veritas.com [166.98.49.16]) by geek.grf.ov.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id KAA12977 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:26:33 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199811101526.KAA12977@geek.grf.ov.com> X-Sender: ksmm@mail.cybercom.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:23:16 -0500 To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG From: The Classiest Man Alive Subject: Re: linux software installation and uname In-Reply-To: References: <199811100432.VAA09970@mt.sri.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Are these ideas mutually exclusive? Is there any reason that a /compat/linux/bin/uname couldn't be scripted which could set the proper environment variable and call the /usr/bin/uname of FreeBSD? In it's absence, the standard /usr/bin/uname would be called. K.S. At 11:54 PM 11/9/98 , Chuck Robey wrote: >Nate, it *seems* that what I'm hearing from him is that he wants to hack >uname so that it would respond to the environmental variables that you >want him to write wrappers for. I think you're right, you want >wrappers, but the uname thing is something that most commercial wrappers >rely on. He just wants uname to listen to some environmental variables. > >If there's some other way to do it, I haven't seen it yet ... am I >wrong? > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message