uname Output

[Robert L. Hemus]

On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 09:50, Chris Kassopulo wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:48:16 -0700
> Collins Richey <crichey at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:36:46 -0500, Jerry McBride <mcbrides9 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > On Sunday 16 January 2005 11:58 pm, Collins Richey wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:50:52 -0500, Jerry McBride <mcbrides9 at comcast.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday 16 January 2005 10:39 pm, Ian Stephen wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 18:48, Kurt Wall wrote:
> > > > > > > So, I execute 'uname -a' and I get the following:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > $ uname -a
> > > > > > > Linux luther 2.6.10 #1 Sat Jan 15 01:43:34 EST 2005 i686 unknown
> > > > > > > unknown GNU/Linux
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The two "unknown" fields are for the processor and hardware platform,
> > > > > > > which _ought_ to be pretty well known. The processor is an AMD Athlon
> > > > > > > 1200 and the hardware platform is IA32, or whatever Intel is calling
> > > > > > > their 32-bit x86 systems these days.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How do I get this into my uname string?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Huh, I get
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Linux localhost 2.6.3-7mdk #1 Wed Mar 17 15:56:42 CET 2004 i686 unknown
> > > > > > unknown
> > > > >
> > > > > How does that compare to /proc/cpuinfo?
> > > > >
> > > > > Mine says:
> > > > >
> > > > > Linux spinner 2.6.10 #3 Sat Jan 8 16:32:26 EST 2005 i686 AMD Athlon(tm)
> > > > > XP 3200+ AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux
> > > > >
> > > > > Which is right out of /proc/....
> > > >
> > > > Me thinkest thou mightest be running Slackware. I get the same results
> > > > on my Slackware system with the default 2.4 kernel. On Gentoo,
> > > > however, I get the normal values.
> > > >
> > > > HTH,
> > > 
> > > Nope Gentoo.... I compile my own kernels. Perhaps there's something to that?
> > 
> > Sorry, my comment was directed at Kurt, who is the sufferee in this
> > thread. To reiterate, my Slack system displays unknown values in the
> > uname -a display.
> 
> I get
> Linux linux 2.4.20-4GB #1 Mon Mar 17 17:54:44 UTC 2003 i686 unknown unknown GNU/Linux
> on a Suse 8.2 box with a default kernel.
> Proc has it right.
> 
> Chris
My SuSE 9.0 is 
bobhemus at linux:~> uname -a
Linux linux 2.4.21-99-smp4G #1 SMP Wed Sep 24 14:13:20 UTC 2003 i686
i686 i386 GNU/Linux
 
bobhemus at linux:~> cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 15
model           : 2
model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.60GHz
stepping        : 9
cpu MHz         : 2593.731
cache size      : 512 KB
physical id     : 0
siblings        : 2
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 2
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge
mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm
bogomips        : 5128.19

processor       : 1
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 15
model           : 2
model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.60GHz
stepping        : 9
cpu MHz         : 2593.731
cache size      : 512 KB
physical id     : 0
siblings        : 2
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 2
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge
mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm
bogomips        : 5177.34

Being not as bright as the rest of you folks, why is the processor 1
bogomips 5177.34 and the processor 0 bogomips 5128.19?  I thought I had
only one processor??
Bob