on 16/11/2012 01:09 Dimitry Andric said the following: > And as I remarked in another reply, now that I have thought about it a > bit, I would much rather see this information moved to a sysctl or dmesg > line, than in uname. With the happy side effect that no existing uname > parsers would be confused!
I would still like to have at least compiler's "base name" or type or something in uname. -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
