Re: [Devil-linux-develop] uname for lfssystem

[Heiko Z. <he...@zu...>]

Quoting Serge Leschinsky <fi...@in...>:

> Hi,
>
> There is a question I cannot resolve myself. May I ask to give me a hint?
>
> Which "uname" output is more correct (from our build system's viewpoint) ?
>
> 1) We have it now:
> root:/data/build# /bin/uname -a
> Linux zab-dev.nn.t.com 2.6.24.3 #1 SMP Wed Feb 20 15:59:10 EST 2008   
> i686 x86_64
> x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> 2) I think it's more strictly, but I'm unsure.
> root:/data/build# /bin/uname -a
> Linux zab-dev.nn.t.com 2.6.24.3 #1 SMP Wed Feb 20 15:59:10 EST 2008 i686 i686
> i686 GNU/Linux
>
> The difference is trivial:
> build.sh ( line 403)
> - sed -e 's/i.86/i$CONFIG_CPU/'  | sed -e 's/x86_64/i$CONFIG_CPU/'
> + sed -e 's/i.86/i$CONFIG_CPU/g' | sed -e 's/x86_64/i$CONFIG_CPU/g'

Good catch Serge!
I think we need the 'g' in there, since we nedd to make sure we  
completely fool the build scripts into thinking it's a 32 bit machine.

Heiko

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.