I don't think this is in the scope of the LSB until someone does it and it beomes accepted usage. AFAIK, the LSB is not the business of adding new and untested features to software (including the kernel). The first step for something like this is to get the kernel developers to agree to it; perhaps you should try the kernel-devel list.
And lo, the chronicles report that Lou Grinzo spake thusly unto the masses: > > I agree. I think this is clearly a case where a standard would > be very helpful. There are several benefits to having this kind > of information readily available via a standard mechanism and > in a standard format. > > If nothing else, it would make cross-platform development (meaning > for Linux on different architectures) a bit easier. Given Linux's > immense potential in this area, this sort of information gathering > should be made easier. > > > Lou > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert > W. Current > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 12:48 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: system calls, like uname > > I suggest a general system call be implemented to obtain information > about hardware. > > [rest trimmed] > > > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Aaron Gaudio icy_manipulator @ mindless.com http://www.rit.edu/~adg1653 -------------- "The fool finds ignorance all around him. The wise man finds ignorance within." -------------- Use of any of my email addresses is subject to the terms found at http://www.rit.edu/~adg1653/email.shtml. By using any of my addresses, you agree to be bound by the terms therein.
