From: Ed Lucas <ejl@eberian.com>
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Motherboard-specific configurations (sensors4mobo)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:00:32 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <460B8E40.9050908@eberian.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46084A44.4070101@eberian.com>
Morning All,
>>> We were thinking about using the following:
>>> system-manufacturer
>>> system-product-name
>>> system-version
>>> baseboard-manufacturer
>>> baseboard-product-name
>>> baseboard-version
I have cobbled together new versions of the sensors4mobo tools that only
use those six parameters. The web server now does a very basic check for
six parameters and the table marks the broken ones (loads more work &
sanity checking to be done here). One valid file so far, and I will see
about updating the rest when I have the time.
I have also added a "tags" field in which you can add a fixed set of
tags to describe the file: so far I have thought of "broken",
"experimental" and "beta". Perhaps this goes some way towards emulating
your "unsure" database flag, Ivo? I went for the name "tags" rather than
"status" so that other info could be added with minimal api changes.
This is more for my sensors overlay work, so feel free to disregard it
if it doesn't fit your goals.
Can anyone point me towards a description of the "dynamic chips support"
for libsensors that Jean mentioned. (Sorry, my googling failed on this).
For motherboard specific sensors.conf files, would it make sense to use
the same fan labels that are used in the manual and on the motherboard
itself? (What is the offical naming policy? - grepping sensors.conf
shows a range of names)
Best regards,
Ed
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-29 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-26 22:33 [lm-sensors] Motherboard-specific configurations (sensors4mobo) Ed Lucas
2007-03-27 15:39 ` Jean Delvare
2007-03-27 16:07 ` Ivo Manca
2007-03-28 9:30 ` Ed Lucas
2007-03-28 10:56 ` Ivo Manca
2007-03-28 11:20 ` Hans de Goede
2007-03-28 11:49 ` Ed Lucas
2007-03-28 12:07 ` Ivo Manca
2007-03-28 17:09 ` David Hubbard
2007-03-29 8:03 ` Pinkel
2007-03-29 10:00 ` Ed Lucas [this message]
2007-03-29 13:20 ` Ivo Manca
2007-03-29 14:18 ` Ed Lucas
2007-03-29 14:56 ` Hans de Goede
2007-03-31 12:22 ` Jean Delvare
2007-03-31 12:36 ` Jean Delvare
2007-03-31 12:42 ` Jean Delvare
2007-03-31 12:45 ` Jean Delvare
2007-03-31 12:50 ` Jean Delvare
2007-04-04 9:34 ` Ivo Manca
2007-04-08 11:13 ` Jean Delvare
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=460B8E40.9050908@eberian.com \
--to=ejl@eberian.com \
--cc=lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.