Robert Connolly wrote these words on 04/24/07 01:57 CST: > On Tuesday April 24 2007 02:50, Randy McMurchy wrote: > >> What would it report without the patch? > > The "pentium3" would become "unknown". The patch sets "uname -p".
Then -1 to Matt's proposal to remove the patch. Seems dumb to remove a patch that provides a better end product. Why would we want to remove a perfectly functional patch that provides a decent machine name instead of "unknown"? -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.24] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
