Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!whuts!homxb!hropus!ki4pv!tanner
From: tanner@ki4pv.uucp (Dr. T. Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: `uname' survey results -- bad news, it's #@!!%@# useless
Message-ID: <7027@ki4pv.uucp>
Date: 2 Sep 88 22:34:32 GMT
References: <dpeXV#37c3rr=eric@snark.UUCP> <531@vector.UUCP>
Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand
Lines: 13

In article <531@vector.UUCP>, chip@vector.UUCP (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
> A nit:  under XENIX (SCO's version anyway), uname -n does indeed use
> uname(2) (errrr, I mean uname(S)..blah).

Most of the time, the this yields a bunch of NUL (zero) bytes for the
system name, making it possible for a clever program to know to try
for /etc/systemid (kernel not patched or re-built).

However, the latest "improvement" that I have seen puts three '+' chars
in there.  Now, how is THAT for a useful system name?  Time to hack
the prog to understand both NUL and '+' I guess.
-- 
...!bikini.cis.ufl.edu!ki4pv!tanner  ...!bpa!cdin-1!cdis-1!ki4pv!tanner
or...  {allegra killer gatech!uflorida decvax!ucf-cs}!ki4pv!tanner