Hi Tim, On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 04:02:47PM +0200, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > Willy, > > because we ask for the `uname -a` output on the bug tracker, users sometimes > forget to give all the requested information and I'm tired of always having > to redact my machine names I thought I'd combine the `haproxy -vv + uname -a` > into just `uname -a` by adding the results of uname(2) to the version > information within `haproxy -vv`. My understanding is that the uname(2) > behavior is defined in POSIX, thus I expect this to be portable.
I think it's an excellent idea, I've just merged it. Thanks! Willy
