Bug 208291 – uname --kernel-version doesn't display kernel version

Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.

Bug 208291 - uname --kernel-version doesn't display kernel version

Summary:	uname --kernel-version doesn't display kernel version

Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG

Aliases:	None

Product:	Fedora
Classification:	Fedora
Component:	coreutils (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	5
Hardware:	i386 Linux

Priority	medium Severity low
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Tim Waugh
QA Contact:
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2006-09-27 14:38 EDT by Evert Verhellen
Modified:	2007-11-30 17:11 EST (History)
CC List:	4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2006-10-03 04:36:09 EDT
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Evert Verhellen 2006-09-27 14:38:11 EDT

Description of problem:
The command "uname --kernel-version" doesn't display kernel version.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
coreutils-5.97-1.2

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. uname --kernel-version
  
Actual results:
#1 Sat Jul 1 13:03:45 EDT 2006

Expected results:
2.6.17

Additional info:
The command "uname --kernel-release" works properly as it displays:
"2.6.17-1.2145_FC5". I expect the "--kernel-version" flag to display "2.6.17"
instead of a timestamp.

Comment 1 Tim Waugh 2006-09-28 05:25:55 EDT

It's just reporting what the kernel tells it to from the uname() syscall. 
Reassigning.

Comment 2 Dave Jones 2006-10-02 20:19:42 EDT

Tim, I see no evidence that this ever did anything different.
Here's a RHEL3 box running 2.4 kernel..

(20:16:16:davej@devserv:davej)$ uname --kernel-version
#1 SMP Thu Dec 1 20:31:15 EST 2005
(20:16:16:davej@devserv:davej)$ uname -r
2.4.21-38.ELsmp

uname -r works in FC5 too.

Clearly uname can get the right string with uname -r, so this looks like a
userspace bug to me ?

Comment 3 Karel Zak 2006-10-03 04:08:36 EDT

This is not util from the util-linux package:

  # rpm -qf /bin/uname
  coreutils-5.97-1.1

and ... I don't think there is any problem with uname:

  $ cat /proc/sys/kernel/version; uname --kernel-version
  #1 Tue Aug 8 15:30:55 EDT 2006
  #1 Tue Aug 8 15:30:55 EDT 2006

  $ cat /proc/sys/kernel/osrelease; uname --kernel-release
  2.6.17-1.2174_FC5
  2.6.17-1.2174_FC5

and ... "--kernel-version" != "-r", see man page. 

Reassigning to coreutils.

Comment 4 Tim Waugh 2006-10-03 04:36:09 EDT

..back in a circle.  No one can find any bug here.  Closing.

Comment 5 Evert Verhellen 2006-10-03 16:05:36 EDT

What do you mean there's no bug? As far as I can tell, timestamps and kernel
versions are 2 different things, right?

Comment 6 Tim Waugh 2006-10-03 18:29:26 EDT

'#1' is the _version_ number, and you get the build timestamp as well -- you are
thinking of the _release_ number.

uname is just reporting what the kernel says.  You ask for the version number,
you get the version number.  Ask for the release, you get the release instead. 
There is no bug here.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.