rawhide report: 20050205 changes

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb  7, 2005, Arjan van de Ven <arjanv at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 12:16:58AM +0000, Tim Waugh wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 10:21:08AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> 
>> > this is already wrong. The "athlon" hack is *WRONG*.  Athlon is a
>> > marketing name, it could just as well be a duron or a sempron.
>> > It was a mistake to put the athlon hack in uname (but hindsight is
>> > easy); it's imo very wrong to repeat that mistake.
>> 
>> Should I take it out?

> hard dilemma in that it risks breaking existing stuff....

The most common case in which I've seen scripts depend on athlon or
ia32e is to build kernels and kernel modules.  Since the removal of
athlon- and ia32e-specific kernels, having uname print athlon or ia32e
no longer helps; it actually gets in the way.  So my vote would be to
get rid of it.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}