context team mailing list archive

["Mojca Miklavec" <mojca.miklavec.lists@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
>> On TL their name is i386-solaris (uname returns solaris), the current
>> name that Hans suggested a while ago is sunos-intel. We started with
>> "sun" (sparc-solaris on TL), but that doesn't work at the moment.
>
>  solaris-intel, in that order (to match osx-intel, etc.).  SunOS has a
> slightly older tune to it, since it's the name that Sun used for its OS,
> before it was changed to Solaris (about 15 years ago, and clearly we are
> not going to support that).

Just one more thing ... uname -s returns SunOS? Why does TeXLive use
solaris then? (I was confused by the latter.)


On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>
> I would have preferred "i386" instead of "intel" and
> "linux-i386" instead of "linux" and "linux-x86_64" instead of "linux-64"
> but it is I assume it is too late to change that now?


The price to pay would be one broken update procedure.

The names seemed a bit weird (too long) to me, that's all. We kept the
names that Hans had (back then when there was still only support for
both flavours of linux, windows and mac) Apart from linux no uname
value made sense. Windows has none, and I bet that many Mac owners
have never heard of Darwin.

I do not favor those weird names for linux, but if more people say
that we should use them, I have no problem with that.

One thing that is a bit weird is that those strings (linux-64
osx-intel etc.) are hardcoded in luatex, if I remember correctly. (I
might be wrong.) At that level they should indeed better be called
linux-i386. But I should check again to remember all the details of
past discussions.

Mojca