cvs commit: patches/coreutils coreutils-5.2.0-uname-x86-1.patch
Kevin P. Fleming
kpfleming at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Mar 2 16:06:58 PST 2004
Nico R. wrote:
> Shouldn't ecx and edx be checked as well? Just to make sure.
> Of course, the current version of the patch will work, but I'm getting
> this slightly uncomfortable feeling ... ;-)
Me too. There's a cpuid program out there (from Dave Jones I think) that
does all this and more, and is kept up-to-date with all new processors.
If we try to put even a part of this into uname, then we'll be forever
responsible for keeping track of the changes in cpuid, otherwise people
will wonder why the _LFS_ uname isn't correct for their Pentium 4 Xeon
Double-Whammy With Extra Swiss Cheese.
Certainly making uname put out something useful is worthwhile, but IMHO
it should be left as generic as possible (i.e. only what's required to
get toolchain building to work).
More information about the patches