cvs commit: patches/coreutils coreutils-5.2.0-uname-x86-1.patch

Kevin P. Fleming kpfleming at
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 mailing list