Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On Tue, 2023-04-25 at 17:49 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > The man page still has '-p' and '-i', so that's at least a > > documentation bug. > > The options are still accepted. They just don't produce the > same output they did with a non-upstream patch. > > Changed output across a major release isn't all that > unreasonable -- even if it may be annoying to anyone who has > come to rely on that output. :) > > Those options were marked as non-portable for many years > (since 2015, according to the BZ referenced in the git > commit which dropped the patch). Using them on non-Fedora > systems would already be likely to produce different > results. > > Considering there is an option which provides the same > output that has worked for many years: > > s/uname -p/uname -m/ > > shouldn't be too much of an issue. > > Whether they should be removed entirely from the code and > docs is likely something to discuss with the upstream > coreutils project. I'd call this disingenuous. If the behaviour of the options has changed, the documentation should change to reflect that. Keeping or removing them is a separate issue. poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On 4/25/23 17:56, Todd Zullinger wrote: Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 5:18 PM Todd Zullinger wrote: A non-upstream patch was removed¹, which had kept the long-deprecated uname -i and -p options. ¹ https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/coreutils/c/cd953e1 uname (1) says -i and -p are valid options: -p, --processor print the processor type (non-portable) -i, --hardware-platform print the hardware platform (non-portable) They are valid options, but there is no longer a Fedora patch which made them report the same as `uname -m`. They now report 'unknown' which isn't terribly useful. The solution is use `uname -m` (which has been the ideal option to use for some time -- it's only now exposed to Fedora users, who had been getting a downstream patch). An alternative to that, if you have to change your scripts, is to use the "arch" command: $ arch x86_64 ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 5:18 PM Todd Zullinger wrote: >> A non-upstream patch was removed¹, which had kept the >> long-deprecated uname -i and -p options. >> >> ¹ https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/coreutils/c/cd953e1 > > uname (1) says -i and -p are valid options: > >-p, --processor > print the processor type (non-portable) > >-i, --hardware-platform > print the hardware platform (non-portable) They are valid options, but there is no longer a Fedora patch which made them report the same as `uname -m`. They now report 'unknown' which isn't terribly useful. The solution is use `uname -m` (which has been the ideal option to use for some time -- it's only now exposed to Fedora users, who had been getting a downstream patch). -- Todd signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 5:18 PM Todd Zullinger wrote: > > Tom Horsley wrote: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2189656 > > > > God knows how many scripts I have that use "uname -p" to get > > the architecture name, but it now returns "unknown" instead of > > "x86_64". > > > > I guess I'll replace uname with a script that invokes the real > > uname unless it is called with the -p option, then echoes x86_64 :-). > > It's not a bug. :) > > A non-upstream patch was removed¹, which had kept the > long-deprecated uname -i and -p options. > > ¹ https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/coreutils/c/cd953e1 uname (1) says -i and -p are valid options: -p, --processor print the processor type (non-portable) -i, --hardware-platform print the hardware platform (non-portable) > `uname -m` is probably what you want to use in those > scripts, if you were looking for x86_64 as the output. Jeff ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 18:58:45 -0400 Todd Zullinger wrote: > One idea for tracking things down which aren't stored in a > place which is reasonable to grep, is a uname script which > overrides the default uname command I was going to do that, but I found the old f37 uname command runs fine on f38, so I just replaced the f38 version (for now, I'll eventually need something that can survive a coreutils update :-). ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
Tom Horsley wrote: > On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 17:49:08 -0400 > Todd Zullinger wrote: > >> s/uname -p/uname -m/ >> >> shouldn't be too much of an issue. > > Right, just have to locate the 47,321 scripts which have some variation > of that command in them. No problem at all :-). I have good news and bad news... This may be an opportunity to notice that the decade's long deprecation of egrep now causes a warning to stderr too. $ egrep . /etc/os-release >/dev/null egrep: warning: egrep is obsolescent; using grep -E I wasn't sure I'd live to see the day that deprecation moved forward, but here it is. ;-) One idea for tracking things down which aren't stored in a place which is reasonable to grep, is a uname script which overrides the default uname command, logs the usage of -i/-p and the calling script, then replaces it with -m and exec's the real uname. (Which may be just what you were already planning.) -- Todd signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 17:49:08 -0400 Todd Zullinger wrote: > s/uname -p/uname -m/ > > shouldn't be too much of an issue. Right, just have to locate the 47,321 scripts which have some variation of that command in them. No problem at all :-). ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > The man page still has '-p' and '-i', so that's at least a > documentation bug. The options are still accepted. They just don't produce the same output they did with a non-upstream patch. Changed output across a major release isn't all that unreasonable -- even if it may be annoying to anyone who has come to rely on that output. :) Those options were marked as non-portable for many years (since 2015, according to the BZ referenced in the git commit which dropped the patch). Using them on non-Fedora systems would already be likely to produce different results. Considering there is an option which provides the same output that has worked for many years: s/uname -p/uname -m/ shouldn't be too much of an issue. Whether they should be removed entirely from the code and docs is likely something to discuss with the upstream coreutils project. -- Todd signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On Tue, 2023-04-25 at 17:18 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Tom Horsley wrote: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2189656 > > > > God knows how many scripts I have that use "uname -p" to get > > the architecture name, but it now returns "unknown" instead of > > "x86_64". > > > > I guess I'll replace uname with a script that invokes the real > > uname unless it is called with the -p option, then echoes x86_64 :- > > ). > > It's not a bug. :) > > A non-upstream patch was removed¹, which had kept the > long-deprecated uname -i and -p options. > > ¹ https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/coreutils/c/cd953e1 > > `uname -m` is probably what you want to use in those > scripts, if you were looking for x86_64 as the output. The man page still has '-p' and '-i', so that's at least a documentation bug. poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 17:18:21 -0400 Todd Zullinger wrote: > It's not a bug. :) That's a matter of opinion. :-(. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
Tom Horsley wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2189656 > > God knows how many scripts I have that use "uname -p" to get > the architecture name, but it now returns "unknown" instead of > "x86_64". > > I guess I'll replace uname with a script that invokes the real > uname unless it is called with the -p option, then echoes x86_64 :-). It's not a bug. :) A non-upstream patch was removed¹, which had kept the long-deprecated uname -i and -p options. ¹ https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/coreutils/c/cd953e1 `uname -m` is probably what you want to use in those scripts, if you were looking for x86_64 as the output. -- Todd signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
My first f38 bug: uname doesn't work
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2189656 God knows how many scripts I have that use "uname -p" to get the architecture name, but it now returns "unknown" instead of "x86_64". I guess I'll replace uname with a script that invokes the real uname unless it is called with the -p option, then echoes x86_64 :-). ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
