Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 17:25:51 -0500 From: Thomas David Rivers <rivers%ponds@ncren.net> To: freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: uname -a/uname -v broken (or not?) Message-ID: <199412302225.RAA04475@ponds.UUCP>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm not up in the particulars of POSIX here, but I was just playing
aroung with uname and noticed the following output of 'uname -a'.
FreeBSD lakes.water.net 2.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 2.0-RELEASE #1: Mon Dec 5 21:06:49 EST 1994 rivers@lakes.water.net:/usr/src/sys/compile/LAKES i386
Now, I know I've written shell scripts that don't use the uname options,
but depend on the fact that fields are blank separated, and use uname -a.
The '-v' (the version level) output contains *many* spaces (around
the build date, who built it, etc...) which, of course, would break
any such assumption.
>From the man page, we have the text:
If the -a flag is specified, or multiple flags are specified, all output
is written on a single line, separated by spaces.
which would indicate that the spaces in the version information are incorrect.
The man page claims that uname is POSIX conforming - can someone check
IEE Std1003.2 to see if we've broken this....
If it is broken, what should we use for the "version" information?
- Dave Rivers -
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199412302225.RAA04475>