On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 17:22:15 +
David Allsopp wrote:
> Oliver Bandel wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 06:01:24PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:42:40AM -0500, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > > > Le jeudi 8 juillet 2010 06:44:34, Richard Jones a écrit :
> > > > > Stdli
Le jeudi 8 juillet 2010 12:01:24, Richard Jones a écrit :
> Actually I misunderstood the link I posted
> (http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online/pages/man2/uname.2.html#NOTES)
> thinking it meant that the string fields in the structure could have
> variable width. Reading it again, they don't.
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 01:09:41PM +0200, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Richard Jones wrote:
>
> > How about running the external "uname" program.
>
> Yes, why not. I was hoping that I wouldn't have to resort to that kind
> of hacks, that I was missing a function using
Oliver Bandel wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 06:01:24PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:42:40AM -0500, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > > Le jeudi 8 juillet 2010 06:44:34, Richard Jones a écrit :
> > > > Stdlib could bind the uname(2) syscall, but it's legendary in its
> > >
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 06:01:24PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:42:40AM -0500, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > Le jeudi 8 juillet 2010 06:44:34, Richard Jones a écrit :
> > > Stdlib could bind the uname(2) syscall, but it's legendary in its
> > > complexity. Seems more likely
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:42:40AM -0500, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> Le jeudi 8 juillet 2010 06:44:34, Richard Jones a écrit :
> > Stdlib could bind the uname(2) syscall, but it's legendary in its
> > complexity. Seems more likely to cause problems than just calling out
> > to the external program.
>
Le jeudi 8 juillet 2010 06:44:34, Richard Jones a écrit :
> Stdlib could bind the uname(2) syscall, but it's legendary in its
> complexity. Seems more likely to cause problems than just calling out
> to the external program.
I fail to see the complexity.. Where is it ?
Such a function would also
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 01:09:41PM +0200, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Richard Jones wrote:
>
> > How about running the external "uname" program.
>
> Yes, why not. I was hoping that I wouldn't have to resort to that kind
> of hacks, that I was missing a function using
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Richard Jones wrote:
> How about running the external "uname" program.
Yes, why not. I was hoping that I wouldn't have to resort to that kind
of hacks, that I was missing a function using uname(3) directly.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Alex wrote:
> please
Hello,
> > Is there something in the standard library that allows me to
> > distinguish between oxs and linux (Sys.os_type just returns "Unix" for
> > both).
we had a similar problem, but finally (ab)used
Ocamlbuild_pack.Ocamlbuild_Myocamlbuild_config.system
and
Ocamlbuild_pack.Ocamlbuild
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 12:02:48PM +0200, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
> Is there something in the standard library that allows me to
> distinguish between oxs and linux (Sys.os_type just returns "Unix" for
> both).
How about running the external "uname" program. On Mac OS X
it prints:
$ uname
Darwin
11 matches
Mail list logo
