Bret McMillan wrote:
Mike McGrath wrote:
On 1/31/07, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mike McGrath (mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said:
> *Note: this is not LHCP, which is going to be a much larger project.
> Smolt has a much smaller scope and will ultimately (hopefully) be
> replaced by LHCP when it is ready.
So, the issue I see is that the data appears to be stored as HAL
descriptive strings - these could change over time. Storing
it as vendor/id pairs might be more flexible.
(Or is this actually done that way, and the display on the website
is what's doing the conversion?)
They're presently being pulled from the hardware object created using
the RHN client tools. I'll look to see what it would take to get
vendor/id pairs.
Ouch. The way RHN currently deals with hardware is pretty painful, at
least server-side; a bunch of us are interested in pursuing something
more HAL'ish, drop me a line if you're interested, and maybe we can see
if there are points of commonality.
--Bret
As we'll probably be reusing a lot of that hardware probing code in LHCP
as well i'd be really interested about what/how we can do that better,
so it would be awesome if you could get me in the loop. Our current code
in LHCP is very basic for now (just a prove of concept), so doing that
the same way in smolt and LHCP should be really benefical.
Read ya, Phil
--
Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-470
Development | Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH | Email: Phil Knirsch <phil@xxxxxxxxx>
Hauptstaetterstr. 58 | Web: http://www.redhat.de/
D-70178 Stuttgart
Motd: You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
