Re: [MiNT] uname reply - a final proposition

[Guido Flohr <gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de>]

On Wed, Feb 03, 1999 at 06:59:12PM +0100, Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
> It might be discutable whether uname gives the kernel name but I still
> don't see any good reason for NOT having it say "FreeMiNT". If we go on
> digging in copyright issues we might as well decide to call the
> combination of TOS and MiNT a new TOS version and simply name it TOS 8.x

I don't think that the name "TOS" is less copyrighted than "MiNT". ;-)

This discussion should really be split in two: The first question is,
what should uname reply in the future? My vote (again) is for "FreeMiNT".
This is fair to former copyright holders (BTW, I think "Atari" is now
owned by Hasbro) and it is transparent because the kernel itself is now
called FreeMiNT.

The second question is: What different versions of uname are currently
floating around or what output of uname should be sufficient to detect our
system (whatever it is called).  I will personally prepare for "MiNT",
"FreeMiNT" and "mint" (and maybe "TOS") when I port software.  This will
hopefully work with all past, current and future versions of uname.

Ciao

Guido
-- 
http://stud.uni-sb.de/~gufl0000/
mailto:gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de

Religion has done love a great service by making it a sin.
		-- Anatole France