From owner-cvs-all Fri Sep 14 10:14:35 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from kayak.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF94037B410; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.201]) by kayak.xcllnt.net (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f8EHENm70244; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:14:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@kayak.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.11.6/8.11.3) id f8EHEfu00707; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:14:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:14:38 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: KATO Takenori Cc: imp@harmony.village.org, ru@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: hw.machine vs hw.machine_arch Message-ID: <20010914101438.C465@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <200109131133.f8DBXoO84286@tatu.nendai.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <200109140648.f8E6mFt19413@harmony.village.org> <20010914012406.B16118@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <200109140914.f8E9EZO87758@tatu.nendai.nagoya-u.ac.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200109140914.f8E9EZO87758@tatu.nendai.nagoya-u.ac.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 06:14:30PM +0900, KATO Takenori wrote: > From: Marcel Moolenaar > Subject: Re: hw.machine vs hw.machine_arch > Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 01:24:06 -0700 > > > Both MIBs (ie hw.machine and machdep.ispc98) serve the same purpose > > as far as I can see, so we should be able to remove one of them > > (preferably machdep.ispc98). > > Both machine and machine_arch are `i386' on PC-98 to avoid > problem of third-party applications. Do you know which applications? > If a program uses the machine > instead of the machine_arch, that program can not be used on PC-98 > box. I don't expect that there are a lot of programs that explicitly query hw.machine and bail out if it's not some fixed value. And, technically speaking, it's the programs that are broken and not the kernel, right? > It happens not only when a program uses sysctl, also a program > uses uname (uname returns machine instead of machine_arch.) Yes, it can be argued that with the definitions of hw.machine_arch and hw.machine, uname -m should really be returning hw.machine_arch What I see at this time is a perfectly good definition of the MIBs, but in the only real life example we have it's ignored and violated and a third sysctl variable is needed (machdep.ispc98) to compensate for the loss of information. I think something is broken, whether that's the implementation or the definition is open for debate :-) -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message