Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 13:04:40 +0100
On 2006-11-06 23:24, Eric Schwartz <emschwar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Abigail <abigail@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Yohan N Leder (ynl@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote on MMMMDCCCXV September MCMXCIII in
<URL:news:MPG.1fb9c8bcec77a3639898f6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
__ In article <slrnekv9i1.rtp.abigail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
__ abigail@xxxxxxxxxx says...
__ > What is the "accurate linux distribution" anyway?
__
__ At least something saying Red Hat, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, etc.
__ And better if it say also the major version number.
Then what? Just because it's Red Hat doesn't mean it has package X,
and just it's Debian doesn't mean it doesn't have package X.
If one is writing an installer, it might be useful to know if one is
to use yum, apt-get, or yast to install any dependencies,
So test for the availability of these tools. A stock redhat system
hasn't any of these tools, but the sysadmin might have installed yum or
apt (most of my redhat systems have apt). it might even be possible to
deinstall yast on a suse system.
or which package to prompt the user to install.
Yes, but it generally needs quite special knowledge which changes
frequently. A feature provided by package X in version n might be
provided by package Y in version n+1. So as a hint for the user that's
helpful ("I can't find libfoo, since you are on a Redhat system, it is
probably included in the foo2-devel package", or something like that),
but the same information could just be contained in the README without
any real loss of functionality.
If one is writing a test harness, it's often useful to be able to
report to the person reading the test results what distro was
installed on the system under test.
Right. The distribution (among other details about the environment) is
something you frequently want to include in reports of some kind: Bug
reports (to make it easier to reproduce the problem), configuration
reports (How many servers running desupported OS versions are we still
running?), etc.
To adapt the behaviour of the program to its environment, there are
usually more direct and reliable indicators than the distribution.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | > Wieso sollte man etwas erfinden was nicht
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | > ist?
| | | hjp@xxxxxx | Was sonst wäre der Sinn des Erfindens?
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- P. Einstein u. V. Gringmuth in desd
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: Eric Schwartz
- Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- References:
- What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: Yohan N Leder
- Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: Abigail
- Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: Yohan N Leder
- Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: Abigail
- Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- From: Eric Schwartz
- What is more detailled than $^O ?
- Prev by Date: Re: Creating Windows Shortcuts Programmatically
- Next by Date: Re: Masking/Hiding a password in Perl Source
- Previous by thread: Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- Next by thread: Re: What is more detailled than $^O ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
