Fwd: RFR (S) 8154566: os_linux.cpp parse_os_info gives non descriptive output on current SLES releases

[Coleen Phillimore]

Jerry,  Thank you for looking at this so quickly.

On 4/19/16 4:58 PM, Gerald Thornbrugh wrote:
> Hi Coleen,
>
> It looks like /etc/SuSE-release is deprecated starting with SLE 12 and 
> will be removed in the future.
>
> See:
>
> https://www.suse.com/releasenotes/x86_64/SUSE-SLED/12/
>
> From the link:
>>
>>
>>           5.3.7.2 Use /etc/os-release Instead of /etc/SuSE-release
>>           Report Bug
>>           <https://bugzilla.suse.com/enter_bug.cgi?&product=SUSE%20Linux%20Enterprise%20Desktop%2012&component=Documentation&short_desc=[doc]+&comment=5.3.7.2%20%20Use%20%2Fetc%2Fos-release%20Instead%20of%20%2Fetc%2FSuSE-release%0A%0Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.suse.com%2Freleasenotes%2Fx86_64%2FSUSE-SLED%2F12%2F%23fate-316268>
>>           #
>>           <https://www.suse.com/releasenotes/x86_64/SUSE-SLED/12/#fate-316268>
>>
>> /Starting with SLE 12, /etc/SuSE-release file is deprecated. It 
>> should not be used to identify a SUSE Linux Enterprise system. This 
>> file will be removed in a future Service Pack or release./
>>
>> The file |/etc/os-release| now is decisive. This file is a 
>> cross-distribution standard to identify a Linux system. For more 
>> information about the syntax, see the os-release man page ( |man 
>> os-release| ).
>>
>
> So once the /etc/SuSE-release is removed it looks like the code will 
> find the /etc/lsb-release file again and
> this problem may come back unless I am not understanding this correctly.
>
> I wonder if the /etc/os-release file should be moved before the 
> /etc/lsb-release file in the list?

I think this seems reasonable.  For the platforms that I have and that 
we support, it won't make a difference because on OEL, we get 
/etc/oracle-release and for Ubuntu would get PRETTY_NAME from 
/etc/os-release rather than the last line from lsb-release.

So, yes, I'll move os-release above lsb-release.  From the page and my 
google searching, this should be better.

>
> Understanding the implications of that change would take a significant 
> amount of testing.
>

I don't have access to SuSE or other distributions, but this seems like 
a safe thing to change.

Coleen

> Jerry
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: 	RFR (S) 8154566: os_linux.cpp parse_os_info gives non 
>> descriptive output on current SLES releases
>> Date: 	Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:17:40 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: 	Coleen Phillimore <coleen.phillimore at oracle.com>
>> To: 	hotspot-dev developers <hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> Summary: For SuSE, read the first line of the /etc/xrelease file, also
>> get PRETTY_NAME from /etc/os_release
>> Contributed-by:matthias.baesken at sap.com,coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
>>
>> See discussion:
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2016-April/022720.html
>>
>> open webrev athttp://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8154566.01/webrev
>> bug linkhttps://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8154566
>>
>> Tested by Matthias on SuSE and myself on OEL 6.0 and Ubuntu.  Ran
>> hotspot/test/runtime jtreg tests.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen
>>
>>
>