Re: [lm-sensors] also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)

Re: [lm-sensors] also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)

[Jean Delvare]

>       Author: jwrdegoede
>         Date: Fri Jul  6 21:13:50 2007
> New Revision: 4566
>    Changeset: http://lm-sensors.org/changeset/4566
> 
> Modified:
>    lm-sensors/trunk/prog/detect/sensors-detect
> 
> Log:
> also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)

> --- /lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0/prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 4562)
> +++ /lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0/prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 4567)
> @@ -2168,6 +2168,8 @@
>      $modules_conf = '/etc/modules.conf';
>    } elsif (-f '/etc/conf.modules') {
>      $modules_conf = '/etc/conf.modules';
> +  } elsif (-f '/etc/modprobe.conf') {
> +    $modules_conf = '/etc/modprobe.conf';
>    } else { # default
>      $modules_conf = '/etc/modules.conf';
>    }

Very good. We should have done this a long time ago, I think that all
the distributions out there were patching sensors-detect that way.

I would go even further:

* We can probably drop support for /etc/conf.modules entirely?

* If both /etc/modprobe.conf and /etc/modules.conf are present, it is
likely that /etc/modprobe.conf should be used, so I we should test it
first.

* If neither file is found, the default could depend on the kernel
version. Defaulting to /etc/modules.conf for a 2.6 kernel-based system
is rather unlikely to be correct.

-- 
Jean Delvare

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)

[Hans de Goede]

Jean Delvare wrote:
>>       Author: jwrdegoede
>>         Date: Fri Jul  6 21:13:50 2007
>> New Revision: 4566
>>    Changeset: http://lm-sensors.org/changeset/4566
>>
>> Modified:
>>    lm-sensors/trunk/prog/detect/sensors-detect
>>
>> Log:
>> also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)
> 
>> --- /lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0/prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 4562)
>> +++ /lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0/prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 4567)
>> @@ -2168,6 +2168,8 @@
>>      $modules_conf = '/etc/modules.conf';
>>    } elsif (-f '/etc/conf.modules') {
>>      $modules_conf = '/etc/conf.modules';
>> +  } elsif (-f '/etc/modprobe.conf') {
>> +    $modules_conf = '/etc/modprobe.conf';
>>    } else { # default
>>      $modules_conf = '/etc/modules.conf';
>>    }
> 
> Very good. We should have done this a long time ago, I think that all
> the distributions out there were patching sensors-detect that way.
> 
> I would go even further:
> 
> * We can probably drop support for /etc/conf.modules entirely?
> 
> * If both /etc/modprobe.conf and /etc/modules.conf are present, it is
> likely that /etc/modprobe.conf should be used, so I we should test it
> first.
> 
> * If neither file is found, the default could depend on the kernel
> version. Defaulting to /etc/modules.conf for a 2.6 kernel-based system
> is rather unlikely to be correct.
> 

I fully agree, with all of the above. My perl-foo is not all that good, so the 
last bullet / point (default depending on kernel version) is probably best 
handled by someone else. I can implement the other 2 points if you want, but 
those are so trivial that when someone does 3 he can easily do them too, 
eitherway let me know.

Regards,

Hans



_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)

[Jean Delvare]

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 20:01:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Jean Delvare wrote:
> >> --- /lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0/prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 4562)
> >> +++ /lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0/prog/detect/sensors-detect (revision 4567)
> >> @@ -2168,6 +2168,8 @@
> >>      $modules_conf = '/etc/modules.conf';
> >>    } elsif (-f '/etc/conf.modules') {
> >>      $modules_conf = '/etc/conf.modules';
> >> +  } elsif (-f '/etc/modprobe.conf') {
> >> +    $modules_conf = '/etc/modprobe.conf';
> >>    } else { # default
> >>      $modules_conf = '/etc/modules.conf';
> >>    }
> > 
> > Very good. We should have done this a long time ago, I think that all
> > the distributions out there were patching sensors-detect that way.
> > 
> > I would go even further:
> > 
> > * We can probably drop support for /etc/conf.modules entirely?
> > 
> > * If both /etc/modprobe.conf and /etc/modules.conf are present, it is
> > likely that /etc/modprobe.conf should be used, so I we should test it
> > first.
> > 
> > * If neither file is found, the default could depend on the kernel
> > version. Defaulting to /etc/modules.conf for a 2.6 kernel-based system
> > is rather unlikely to be correct.
> 
> I fully agree, with all of the above. My perl-foo is not all that good, so the 
> last bullet / point (default depending on kernel version) is probably best 
> handled by someone else. I can implement the other 2 points if you want, but 
> those are so trivial that when someone does 3 he can easily do them too, 
> eitherway let me know.

I can take care of it. But my initial plan is not correct. My Slackware
system has both /etc/modprobe.conf and /etc/modules.conf... because it
can run with either a 2.4 or a 2.6 kernel, and I actually use both
(it's my test system). In fact, which config file you should edit merely
depends on the kernel version you're running.

So I think I'll go with a more straightforward strategy: if kernel >2.6.0, use /etc/modprobe.conf, otherwise use /etc/modules.conf. OK?

-- 
Jean Delvare

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] also recognise /etc/modprobe.conf (Fedora patch)

[Hans de Goede]

Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 20:01:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> I fully agree, with all of the above. My perl-foo is not all that good, so the 
>> last bullet / point (default depending on kernel version) is probably best 
>> handled by someone else. I can implement the other 2 points if you want, but 
>> those are so trivial that when someone does 3 he can easily do them too, 
>> eitherway let me know.
> 
> I can take care of it. But my initial plan is not correct. My Slackware
> system has both /etc/modprobe.conf and /etc/modules.conf... because it
> can run with either a 2.4 or a 2.6 kernel, and I actually use both
> (it's my test system). In fact, which config file you should edit merely
> depends on the kernel version you're running.
> 
> So I think I'll go with a more straightforward strategy: if kernel >> 2.6.0, use /etc/modprobe.conf, otherwise use /etc/modules.conf. OK?
> 

Sounds fine to me.

Regards,

Hans

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors