On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Matthias Juchem wrote:
> I guess if you use a development version the above returns nothing. If I'm
> right, a pre-release libc was recommended for use with 2.2.0 (I'm not
> sure).
Here is a random idea.
get the pathname of the library(ies) then this sed expression:
sed \
'/C [lL]ibrary /!d; s/[^0-9]*\([0-9.]*\).*/\1/' \
/lib/libc.so.6
For me it returns either 5.4.46 or 2.2 depending on what filename is fed to it.
exp: the first regexp heavily filters the input data for the second so
significantly less cpu is spent for the real matching.
/C [lL]ibrary /!d -- match example: "C Library "
match #1: [^0-9]*
match everything until we hit a digit
match #2: \([0-9.]*\)
match all digits and '.' and use pattern space #1
match #3: .*
match the remainder
We're left with pattern space #1 holding the assumed library version number.
This is done with sed version GNU 3.02.80, some versions differ, buyer beware.
$ sed '/C [lL]ibrary /!d; s/[^0-9]*\([0-9.]*\).*/\1/' /lib/libc.so.6
2.2
$ sed '/C [lL]ibrary /!d; s/[^0-9]*\([0-9.]*\).*/\1/' /lib/libc.so.5
5.4.46
$
-d
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:27 EST