From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Nov 9 20:31:48 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA07797 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 20:31:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (sri-gw.MT.net [206.127.105.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA07786 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 20:31:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA11124; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 21:31:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA09963; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 21:31:28 -0700 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 21:31:28 -0700 Message-Id: <199811100431.VAA09963@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: dan@math.berkeley.edu (Dan Strick) Cc: nate@mt.sri.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: linux software installation and uname In-Reply-To: <199811100025.QAA04722@math.berkeley.edu> References: <199811100025.QAA04722@math.berkeley.edu> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > No, but in order to get the 'correct' behavior, I have to know which OS > > I need emulated so I can set the environment variable correctly. > > > > So, if I want to run SCO's Informix which uses uname (it does, BTW), I > > have to set 'ALT_UNAME' to "SCO". Then, I want to run StarOffice, so I > > have set 'ALT_UNAME' to "Linux", then I want to run the JDK, so I have > > to set 'ALT_UNAME' to "Solaris", or was it the Linux version that I was > > running? I don't remember if it was the Solaris version, or the Linux > > version? > > > > The point is that it's *NOT* transparent to the users, so the solution > > isn't any better than the initial problem, but it adds more bloat and > > more 'magic' solutions that are no better than editing shells scripts. > > So you wrap a small shell script around certain commands that require > special things in their environment. This is what I proposed, not hacking up the FreeBSD sources to have OS specific commands in them. Modifying uname when in fact the installation requires fixing is the better solution. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message