Re: Request for review/comments - new option for uname(1)

2000-08-09 Thread Chris Costello
On Wednesday, August 09, 2000, Mark Ovens wrote: The only thing I couldn't work out is why sysctl() adds 5 spaces after the date sub-string, so I've haven't stripped them out (hence the indented third line). sysctl() does not do that, that's what the data in the kernel is. Look at

Re: Request for review/comments - new option for uname(1)

2000-08-09 Thread Will Andrews
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:59:29AM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote: Is there any reason why this is unacceptable and could not be committed? Because it can be done with an awk/sed script? -- Will Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] GCS/E/S @d- s+:+ a--- C++ UB$ P+ L- E--- W+ N-- !o ?K

Re: Request for review/comments - new option for uname(1)

2000-08-09 Thread Mark Ovens
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:33:44PM -0400, Will Andrews wrote: On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:59:29AM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote: Is there any reason why this is unacceptable and could not be committed? Because it can be done with an awk/sed script? I'll forget about it then. I only did it

Request for review/comments - new option for uname(1)

2000-08-08 Thread Mark Ovens
The output of ``uname -a'' appears in hundreds of e-mails and PRs yet the output format is not ideal for this (especially e-mail in 80-column mail readers) as it is a single line. Attached is a patch for an enhancement I've made that adds a new option ``-A'' (rather than change ``-a'') that