Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Reply-To: <nhv AT cape DOT com>
From: "Norman Vine" <nhv AT cape DOT com>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: uname -s question
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:21:37 -0500
Message-ID: <000101c09ec0$ec5cfb80$a300a8c0@nhv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2232.26
In-Reply-To: <20010224182251.A6893@redhat.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Importance: Normal

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