This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: uname -s question
- To: <cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com>
- Subject: RE: uname -s question
- From: "Norman Vine" <nhv at cape dot com>
- Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:21:37 -0500
- Reply-To: <nhv at cape dot com>
Christopher Faylor writes:
>
>On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 03:21:10PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
>>On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 01:01:38PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:09:33PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
>>> >Does anyone use the information, that starts with the "_"
>in "uname -s"?
>>> >For example on NT 4.0, I'm referring to the "_NT-4.0".
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> I don't see why this is necessary. It comes up repeatedly and the
>>> extremely simple solution is to match on CYGWIN*. Many
>other systems
>>> use this convention. For instance, look at gdb's configure.in or
>>> configure.tgt script. There is a 'hpux*' and a 'solaris*'.
>>
>>A Python developer was proposing changing sys.platform under Cygwin to
>>return
>>
>> cygwin
>>
>>instead of the current value of
>>
>> cygwin_nt-4.01
>>
>>Which would enable constructs like the following to work:
>>
>> if sys.platform in ['cygwin', 'linux']:
>> # ...
>
>Can't you do something equivalent with regular expressions in python?
Of course, we are doing something 'equivalent' and will contiue todo so.
FWIW
As Jason states this question originated from a Non-Cygwin using,
core Python developer who was wondering about some of changes
that we have been proposing to some 'core' Python utilities in order
to have a Cygwin compiled Python work 'transparently'.
Cheers
Norman Vine