From owner-freebsd-emulation Fri Oct 10 05:15:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id FAA10160 for emulation-outgoing; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 05:15:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-emulation) Received: from elvis.vnet.net (elvis.vnet.net [166.82.1.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA10152 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 05:15:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rivers@dignus.com) Received: from ponds.dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48]) by elvis.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id IAA25070; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:15:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes [10.0.0.3]) by ponds.dignus.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA22224; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:30:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id IAA08936; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:20:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:20:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas David Rivers Message-Id: <199710101220.IAA08936@lakes.dignus.com> To: mike@smith.net.au, rivers@dignus.com Subject: Re: LINUX emulation and uname(3). Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > This question should have been posted on the -emulation list, to where > it has been moved. That sounds great! Thanks... > > > I have a program, written for Linux, that uses the uname() information > > as part of its license check... > > > > Unfortunately, the check fails... the company indicates that the > > failure is due to incorrect uname() information. > > > > So - does the uname() call under Linux emulation claim to be a LINUX > > box? - or - does it claim to be a FreeBSD box... > > Does the application make a uname() call, or does it attempt to run a > 'uname' executable? It makes the uname() system call. > > > Which should it do? Seems to me, for accurate Linux emulation, it should > > claim to be Linux... > > Do you see a console message saying: > > linux_emul(%d): olduname() not supported > > ? If not, the Linux uname will return the contents of the kern.ostype > sysctl. Nope - I didn't see that on the console... Also, I've got a simple Linux program that calls uname() and prints the info... it claims to be FreeBSD. > > > - Opinions? - > > I am not sure that I agree that uname() should claim to be Linux when > we're not. Then again, perhaps we should use something more subtle to > indicate that we're a FreeBSD system. > > Why is this product so paranoid? They taylor their license key to a particular system... why; well, just because... who am I to say? - Dave Rivers -