From: Bernard Li on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 10:28 AM > > > > Good point. I had been thinking that linux_distro_ver would be a > > numeric value, but there's really no reason that it needs to > > be (and in > > fact, would probably be a bad idea to assume that it is). So > > "redhat" > > for 8, 9, el, etc. is probably good. > > I like the idea of differentiating red hat linux with red hat enterprise > linux and thus the different notation rhl and rhel, but that's just me. > And it might be a moot point if we stop supporting rhl9.
This is an unnecessary complication. The various Red Hat X are way more similar than different, e.g., if this is a RH system, I have a "service" command (not that I'm advocating anybody ever use that command in any part of OSCAR for any reason under any circumstance at any time). > We probably want to include update version for linux_distro_ver eg. > rhel3 has multiple update versions so it would be something like: > > linux_distro = rhel > linux_distro_ver = 3u5 Hmmm. On the one hand, it's the same distro release; on the other hand, there have been enough differences that it may be a prudent distinction. The bottom line is: Which is harder to do? _ver=3u5 makes is harder to treat the updates similarly, while _ver=3 and _ver_update=5 makes it harder to treat the updates differently. There's also the user to consider, what error message will they get and how will they report it? -- David N. Lombard My comments represent my opinions, not those of Intel Corporation. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: GoToMeeting - the easiest way to collaborate online with coworkers and clients while avoiding the high cost of travel and communications. There is no equipment to buy and you can meet as often as you want. Try it free.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt02&alloc_id135&op=click _______________________________________________ Oscar-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
