Re: dpkg --print-installation-architecture, minimal version
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 12, 1999 at 12:10:01AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Joel Klecker wrote:
> > At 19:59 +0100 1999-01-09, Juan Cespedes wrote:
> > >uname -m | sed -e s/i.86/i386/ -e s/sun4u/sparc64/ -e s/arm.*/arm/
> > > -e s/sa110/arm/
> > >
> > > (copied from linux/Makefile in the kernel sources).
>
> So this should work on all our architectures:
> uname -m | sed \
> -e /i.86/i386/ \
> -e s/sun4u/sparc64/ \
> -e s/arm.*/arm/ \
> -e s/ppc/powerpc/
>
> Right? Then I would only need to fiddle around some more for m68k
> subarchitectures..
First let me point out that this is _not_ a substitute for
--print-installation-architecture. There is _no_ substitute for it, because
the string is hardcoded in the dpkg binary. I just noticeed that
update-modutils uses --print-installation-architecture, which does not fit
the bill, IMHO. (this option returns a Debian ftp tree, like "hurd-i386".
That this matches the cpu is coincidence).
Second, what do you really want is the cpu. "dpkg
--print-gnu-build-architecture" does that, but it uses gcc, which is also
broken, IMHO. So, using uname or similar seems to be the best solution, as
uname is tightly connected to the kernel running.
> Can someone tell me if this will also work on the HURD?
It doesn't need to. The Hurd will probably never run update-modules, as it
does not use Linux kernel modules. Maybe it will emulate an interface for
them later, but I don't think the Linux module utilites will work out of the
box anyway. "modutils" is currently on my list of packages which will not be
ported to the Hurd anytime soon.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: