[OpenAFS] Re: sysname for 3.x linux kernel

[Benjamin Kaduk]

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:

> Andrew Deason <adeason@sinenomine.net> writes:
>
>> Secondly, this is easily modifiable by distributions. I think the
>> closest thing Linux has to a "platform" like those of commercial unices
>> (and maybe the BSDs) is a distribution-specific moniker. Just because
>> the OpenAFS project doesn't include anything more specific than
>> "$arch_linux26" by default doesn't mean we can't have a distro-specific
>> tag by default in front of that (and the RPMs related to this thread are
>> already doing that). That seems like a pretty easy way to get more
>> granularity and be more 'modern'.
>
> I suppose I could do that in Debian.  I'd feel more comfortable doing it
> if any Debian user had ever indicated a desire for an @sys that identified
> the Debian stable version (which would be the obvious thing to put in
> there).
>
> If I do that for Debian, though, Ubuntu is going to be a mess.

You mean like this?
[kaduk ~]$ ssh athena.dialup.mit.edu fs sysname
Current sysname list is 'amd64_ubuntu1004' 'i386_ubuntu1004' 
'amd64_ubuntu910' 'i386_ubuntu910' 'amd64_ubuntu904' 'i386_ubuntu904' 
'amd64_deb50' 'i386_deb50' 'amd64_ubuntu804' 'i386_ubuntu804' 
'amd64_deb40' 'i386_deb40' 'i386_rhel4' 'i386_rhel3' 'i386_linux24'

We do still have substantial software deployments in AFS, and the glibc 
version changes do bite us fairly often, so we need that extra 
granularity.

-Ben