Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
So is there a way I can check the architecture? Also, I would like to
know if the machine is sun4m, as that can not be upgraded to Solaris
10. Since Solaris 10 is the only supported version of Solaris, and
earlier (sun4m) hardware can not be upgraded, I would like to be able
to test the architecture.
arch=`uname -m`
Any, that aside, how could I use the output of any arbitrary command,
to return something I can test on?
arch=`uname -m`
I continue to believe that the approach you are taking is wrong since
the work is entirely disposable. What you find out this year may be
wong (or insufficient) next year, but maybe next year you will have
moved on to some other project.
I do not believe some of this is every likely to change.
As such, do you see anything wrong with this?
# Test for very old Sun hardware, based on the sun4m architecture.
if test "x`uname -m`" = 'xsun4m'
then
AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
AC_MSG_WARN([You are using a very old computer based on the sun4m ])
AC_MSG_WARN([series of processors. Sun computers of this type could])
AC_MSG_WARN([be last ordered in June 1997. They can not be updated to ])
AC_MSG_WARN([Solaris 10 or later. As Sage is only supported on Solaris])
AC_MSG_WARN([10 or later, you might experience problems which the Sage])
AC_MSG_WARN([developers have not seen, as they do not test on sun4m ])
AC_MSG_WARN([hardware.])
AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
fi
If the syntax of the test can be improved, please state how. Should the quotes
be single or double?
It is most unlikely that
* Sun will ever bring out a new operating system that it supports on pre 1997
hardware.
* Sage will ever bother supporting such old hardware.
* Sage will ever support any operating system earlier than Solaris 10.
It is must better to document all platform specific issues which are
found and the workarounds. That is what GCC and other large software
usually does.
But how often do you see people report problems, only to be told they are
documented, or to RTFM?
There is also the issue that in the case of Sun hardware, the person building
the software might not know much about the hardware. Such hardware is not like a
PC, where it is likely to be sitting next to you.
I recall hearing about someone who sent for a job and said they had been using a
'bach' computer. Where really 'bach' was the hostname! This was 20+ years ago,
and I guess people are more computer literate now.
IMHO, if you detect a subset of potential problems, and report them, it is
better than doing nothing. It will never be possible to test or document all
issues known or unknown.
VERY often documentation lags code anyway.
Dave
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
