Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/06/23/09:44:35
`uname' doesn't know about P4. The following small change is a
stop-gap (we really should add code which looks into the TYPE field
returned by CPUID, since the future processors will use that field,
having used up all the bits in the FAMILY field).
Comments?
Index: src/libc/posix/utsname/uname.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/djgpp/djgpp/src/libc/posix/utsname/uname.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 uname.c
--- src/libc/posix/utsname/uname.c 2000/05/30 18:13:02 1.4
+++ src/libc/posix/utsname/uname.c 2001/06/23 13:39:19
@@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ int uname(struct utsname *u)
/* What we need is instruction family info in 8-11 bits */
switch ((cpuid_info & 0x780) >> 8)
{
+ case 0x7: strcpy(u->machine, "i786"); break;
case 0x6: strcpy(u->machine, "i686"); break;
case 0x5: strcpy(u->machine, "i586"); break;
case 0x4: strcpy(u->machine, "i486"); break;
- Raw text -