On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 01:43:08PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Petri Koistinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think uname -s should print: GNUmach.
>
> uname -s prints the kernel, but it's the "kernel" in Unixspeak, that
> is, the thing that interprets the "system calls" where the "system
> calls" are read/write/open.
>
> In other words, the canonical case is a monolithic Unix kernel. uname
> -s should describe whatever entity it is that provides the facilities
> provided by a monolithic Unix kernel.
According to documentation of BSD Unix [1], the uname command appeared
in 4.4BSD distribution, and the -s option is suposed to:
"Write the name of the operating system implementation to standard output."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A similar description is made in SystemV derivatives, like Solaris [2].
This is why it's the OS what an awesome number of scripts and makefile systems
always expected to obtain from "uname -s".
[1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=uname&manpath=4.4BSD+Lite2
[2] http://docs.sun.com/db/doc/816-0210/6m6nb7mo6?a=view
> That's the Hurd, in our case.
It is correct as GNU. besides, changing this would break most of the
above mentioned scripts/makefiles.
In my opinion, the adequate solution is fixing GNU uname documentation
to match with the expected documentation of a Unix-like system.
(yes, on GNU/Linux uname would say the OS is "Linux", but this bug
is somewhere else not in uname)
--
Robert Millan
"5 years from now everyone will be running
free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5"
Andrew S. Tanenbaum, 30 Jan 1992
_______________________________________________
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
