Message142493
| Author | lemburg |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Arfrever, Ramchandra Apte, amaury.forgeotdarc, barry, benjamin.peterson, djc, dmalcolm, doko, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, foom, gagern, georg.brandl, jwilk, lemburg, loewis, petri.lehtinen, pitrou, python-dev, r.david.murray, rosslagerwall, sandro.tosi, vstinner |
| Date | 2011-08-19.20:14:39 |
| SpamBayes Score | 8.1804325e-07 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <4E4EC420.8060207@egenix.com> |
| In-reply-to | <1313763975.65.0.0393608400438.issue12326@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
R. David Murray wrote: > > R. David Murray <rdmurray@bitdance.com> added the comment: > > MAL wrote: > >> As already mentioned, the diff between Linux 2.x and 3.x will >> grow over time and while there may not be much to see now, >> things will change in the coming years. > > The only way I can read this argument that makes any sense to me is that you are arguing for a precise build-time OS string. If it is supposed to be an argument in favor of keeping 'linux3' it makes no sense, since '2' vs '3' is in no way a useful line of demarcation when it comes to linux. Indeed. See the sys.build_platform attribute we discussed. > So, if you think there is a *run time* need to know the precise *build time* OS version number, can you point to any specific use cases? I already mentioned those use cases. Please see the ticket discussion. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2011-08-19 20:14:40 | lemburg | set | recipients: + lemburg, loewis, barry, georg.brandl, doko, amaury.forgeotdarc, gagern, foom, pitrou, vstinner, benjamin.peterson, jwilk, djc, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, r.david.murray, dmalcolm, sandro.tosi, rosslagerwall, python-dev, petri.lehtinen, Ramchandra Apte |
| 2011-08-19 20:14:39 | lemburg | link | issue12326 messages |
| 2011-08-19 20:14:39 | lemburg | create | |