Re: Process output of a simple command

[Dr. David Kirkby]

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> > So is there a way I can check the architecture? Also, I would like to 
> > know if the machine is sun4m, as that can not be upgraded to Solaris 
> > 10. Since Solaris 10 is the only supported version of Solaris, and 
> > earlier (sun4m) hardware can not be upgraded, I would like to be able 
> > to test the architecture.
>
> arch=`uname -m`
>
> > Any, that aside, how could I use the output of any arbitrary command, 
> > to return something I can test on?
>
> arch=`uname -m`
>
> I continue to believe that the approach you are taking is wrong since 
> the work is entirely disposable.  What you find out this year may be 
> wong (or insufficient) next year, but maybe next year you will have 
> moved on to some other project.

I do not believe some of this is every likely to change.

As such, do you see anything wrong with this?

# Test for very old Sun hardware, based on the sun4m architecture.
if test "x`uname -m`" = 'xsun4m'
then
    AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
    AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
    AC_MSG_WARN([You are using a very old computer based on the sun4m     ])
    AC_MSG_WARN([series of processors. Sun computers of this type could])
    AC_MSG_WARN([be last ordered in June 1997. They can not be updated to ])
    AC_MSG_WARN([Solaris 10 or later. As Sage is only supported on Solaris])
    AC_MSG_WARN([10 or later, you might experience problems which the Sage])
    AC_MSG_WARN([developers have not seen, as they do not test on sun4m   ])
    AC_MSG_WARN([hardware.])
    AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
    AC_MSG_WARN([*********************************************************])
fi

If the syntax of the test can be improved, please state how. Should the quotes 
be single or double?

It is most unlikely that

* Sun will ever bring out a new operating system that it supports on pre 1997 
hardware.
* Sage will ever bother supporting such old hardware.
* Sage will ever support any operating system earlier than Solaris 10.

> It is must better to document all platform specific issues which are 
> found and the workarounds.  That is what GCC and other large software 
> usually does.

But how often do you see people report problems, only to be told they are 
documented, or to RTFM?

There is also the issue that in the case of Sun hardware, the person building 
the software might not know much about the hardware. Such hardware is not like a 
PC, where it is likely to be sitting next to you.

I recall hearing about someone who sent for a job and said they had been using a 
'bach' computer. Where really 'bach' was the hostname! This was 20+ years ago, 
and I guess people are more computer literate now.

IMHO, if you detect a subset of potential problems, and report them, it is 
better than doing nothing. It will never be possible to test or document all 
issues known or unknown.

VERY often documentation lags code anyway.

Dave