Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 19:41:48 -0700 From: Steve Caine <shc@cfg.com> To: Wes Peters <softweyr@xmission.com> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 'uname -m' not alpha? (was Re: 'uname -m' not i586?) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19970903194148.006c2a38@mail.cfg.com> In-Reply-To: <199709040204.UAA13569@obie.softweyr.ml.org> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970901222635.3114B-100000@localhost> <Pine.BSF.3.96.970901162505.309A-100000@cody.usls.edu> <Pine.BSF.3.96.970901222635.3114B-100000@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Hmm... Does anyone know what Digital UNIX (nee OSF/1) reports as the > architecture for this machine? I suspect it is probably "axp", and > contend we should probably mimic the DEC system if it's not too big a > change at this point. I just checked on my OSF/1 box (running Version 3.2 -- somewhat old). uname -m responds with "alpha". Steve. -- Steve Caine :: shc@cfg.com :: http://www.cfg.com/ Caine, Farber & Gordon, Inc. :: Pasadena, CA, USA
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.3.32.19970903194148.006c2a38>