> never mind. > I think, on the iopener, when sensors-detect gave the IBM warning, > I was running as non-root. > It doesn't give the warning when run as root. > Sorry for the false alarm. I prefer it that way, since I had some difficulties imagining what would have cause such a failure in the detection code. > But anyway, would it be helpful to put out a message in sensors-detect > when it can't determine the system type, even as root? Auxiliary question, should we even accept running as non-root? We can't detect an IBM system if we are not root, still the user can scan any already-loaded bus driver, providing i2c-dev is loaded too. Isn't it dangerous? OTOH i2c-dev shouldn't be loaded on such a system, and i2c-piix4 shouldn't possibly load anyway. (BTW, should I replace DMI with VPD in i2c-piix4/dmi_scan? Or is it considered a feature to use different protection systems? Not all Thinkpads have a DMI table. OTOH, DMI scan is already handled by the kernel so idealy we could get rid of dmi_scan, as it was done in Linux 2.6. And after all, the eeprom module is supposed to be safe WRT faulty eeproms now, so dmi/vpd detection at this level is not really required anymore, right?) To answer your question, failing to detect the system type now (with VPD) can only occur if we can't read /dev/mem (because we are not root, or because a read error occured, which could happen on some non-i386 architectures). Since all Thinkpads are i386 systems AFAIK, the second case isn't really a problem. And we already output a message if the system type couldn't be detected. I'll just leave it in place. > And yes, on the 2 "typical" machines, it doesn't mention VPD. Which basically means "the system is safe", left apart the two cases mentioned above. > nice job on the dmidecode package and website BTW. Thanks :) Do you really like the website. I'm not sure how to organize it. For now, there's a single page with anything on it. I wonder if I should split it into many pages, but actually there isn't that much to write about it, so my conclusion so far was that it wasn't necessary. As for the design, see how clean and easy it is to use CSS and XHTML to get an easy-to-maintain site. Admittedly, I kept the look very simple, half because I like simple and fast-loading pages as a user, half because I am not particularily talented when it comes to complex design. I'd love to see the lm_sensors website with a single CSS and clean HTML pages too, unfortunately I don't really have the time to work on this - and after all the current website does its job rather well, methinks. -- Jean Delvare http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/
