On 09/20/2011 05:06 AM, please try again wrote:
> Why is there a lsb_release command (normally on all lsb compliant
> distros) … and why did I (well … indirectly) submit a bug report to
> help the openSUSE team fixing the missing codename (Celadon) if people
> are advised to use cat /etc/SuSE-release instead?
i am confused by your statement which seems to say that i shouldn’t use
the cat, and should use the lsb_release ??
but, the ‘why’ here is because the ‘people’ sitting in my chair have
been using one of the following two for years (and, i didn’t get the
notice saying i needed to change to something else for some reason):
cat /etc/SuSE-release
cat /etc/issue
i just checked and see that both of those still work (and return an
easy/quick to read answer almost instantaneously)…and like so many
things in linux which have multiple ways of doing the same thing, i find
hard to say that “cat /etc/SuSE-release” is bad and “lsb_release -a” is
good (or even better)…but, i’ll listen as you do…
however, i like the following better than just with the -a switch
(because it give a clean easy to read output):
lsb_release -sd |cut -f2 -d ""\"
do you think it would it be ok if the people i ask are given any of
these that i might pick:
cat /etc/SuSE-release
cat /etc/issue
lsb_release -sd |cut -f2 -d ""\"
lsb_release -a
zypper info lsb-release
unless you know a reason to not use some of those i’d like the freedom
to pick and choose according to how hard or easy i wanted to make it on
the other party…that is, “cat /etc/issue” is easier to type than
lsb_release -sd |cut -f2 -d “”" but that is so much easier to read
than “lsb_release -a” (and of course most would copy/paste, if possible)
and the also hard to read “zypper info lsb-release” takes longer to
process, and . . . . . )
i noticed you used both of the last two as root, but that doesn’t seem
required here…
–
DD
openSUSE®, the “German Automobiles” of operating systems
