Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 06:40:25 -0600 From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: linux software installation and uname Message-ID: <199811101240.GAA08709@bonkers.taronga.com> References: <199811100634.WAA12678@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <Pine.OSF.4.05.9811101703120.10232-100000@spectrum.physics.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Someone pointed out at some point in this somewhat confused discussion that
>that would require people to repeatedly change their environment variables
>before running different emulated binaries, each of which looks for uname(1)
>at runtime.
Are there such binaries? I thought that this was an installation script. I
haven't heard of any binaries barfing on uname(1) or even uname(3). Yes, I
know Netscape complains about FreeBSD's uname(3), but it's nothing you need
to worry about... it's really only install scripts that even have a reason
to care.
This is therefore more like brandelf than LD_LIBRARY_PATH, no? Or are there
actually runtime requirements for magic uname(3) results after all?
--
This is The Reverend Peter da Silva's Boring Sig File - there are no references
to Wolves, Kibo, Discordianism, or The Church of the Subgenius in this document
"The GCOS GERTS interface is so bad that a description here is inappropriate.
Anyone seeking to use this interface should seek divine guidance."
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199811101240.GAA08709>