Re: [OFFTOPIC] Gnumenclature was Re: IBM, was never Re: Linux Kernel

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
3 Jan 1999 00:08:29 -0800


In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.3.95q.990103090214.2175C-100000@mercury.networx.net.au>,
Greg Mildenhall <greg@networx.net.au> wrote:
>On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Larry McVoy wrote:
>> "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <allbery@kf8nh.apk.net>:
>> : "i386-redhat-linux", eh? On S.u.S.E.? Debian? [....]
>
>> His point, I think, was that i386-redhat-linux is quite a bit more
>> accurate and useful than i386-gnu-linux. Ditto for i386-suse-linux
>> and i386-debian-linux.
>Is it? The same package ought to work on all of them,

This isn't kernel related (or maybe it is, depending on what kernel
bits you're trying to interface to) but unless those distributions
all use *exactly* the same libc that assumption won't hold.

>and if it doesn't,
>you _should_ (you won't always) be able to tell from the .deb or .rpm
>extension, not from the name of the package.
>The main reason for this? They all use glibc2.
>How 'bout we call it 1386-glibc2-linux.

Well, that would work pretty well for the distributions that use
glibc, if library location was all you worried about. If location
of binaries was important, then the vendor becomes useful again; but
ia32-glibc2.07-redhat5.2-linux starts becoming a fairly long
typename. A `ia32-glibc2-linux' type tells very very little, except
that this package was probably linked against glibc.

____
david parsons \bi/ ia32-libc4.8-mastodonINST0035-linuxaout? Urk.
\/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/