Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 21:12:44 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: joelh@gnu.org (Joel Ray Holveck) Cc: dfr@nlsystems.com, sos@freebsd.dk, n@nectar.com, nate@mt.sri.com, kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au, dnelson@emsphone.com, rivers@dignus.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: linux software installation and uname Message-ID: <199811110512.VAA01354@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <86k913hy3q.fsf@detlev.UUCP> from Joel Ray Holveck at "Nov 10, 1998 6:28: 9 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
According to Joel Ray Holveck: > >>> Why would we not put a real linux uname(1) in /compat/linux/usr/bin? > >>> This is an emulation issue. Why impact the BSD userland sources? > >> Hear hear!! > > I imagine that the install script is run by /bin/sh, not > > /compat/linux/bin/sh so it will get the regular /usr/bin/uname > > whatever is present in /compat/linux/usr/bin. > > I have yet to hear of any solutions that don't require a hack to the > install procedure (eg, setting an environment variable). Unless > somebody comes up with an idea that would magically detect what > environment a given script wants, I would recommend putting a Linux > uname in /copmat/linux where it belongs, and the install procedure's > PATH can have /compat/linux ahead of /. This is easy to implement, > keeps the core of FreeBSD pure, and paves the way for future > similarities. > What about install scripts that reside on cdroms? You can't magically edit a cdrom install script unless unionfs works. -- Steve finger kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~clesceri/kargl.html 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?199811110512.VAA01354>