Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:33:17 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Jean Delvare wrote: >>> I just finished porting xsensors to the version of libsensors we have >>> in branch lm-sensors-3.0.0. I wanted to have a second application using >>> it at hand, because I don't think that sensors is representative of the >>> rest of the libsensors users: it's one-shot nature make it different. >>> As I want to improve the API, having more than one application will >>> make it less likely that I overlook an important need. >>> >>> You can download the patch from here: >>> http://jdelvare.pck.nerim.net/sensors/xsensors-libsensors4.patch >>> I'll keep it up-to-date as the libsensors API evolves. >>> >>> Note: I don't know how to force an application to link with >>> libsensors.so.4 rather than libsensors.so.3, so you'll have to make >>> sure that libsensors.so.4 is found first when building xsensors. >> Good work! Gnome sensors-applet or the gkrellm libsensors code might also be >> interesting, as those both already use libsensors as a generic chip abstraction >> layer, iow they do not contain any chip specific code, like xsensors it seems >> used to. > > The chip-specific code in xsensors is really only to tell which feature > numbers need to be used for each chip. It really could have been data > tables rather than code. That left apart, xsensors has a greater level > of abstraction than even the new libsensors. For example it describes > the subfeatures "relatively" to the main feature, independent of its > type (e.g. tempX_max and inX_max are handled the same way.) Compare > this to "sensors" which has specific code for each sensor type. This > might be something to consider for libsensors (SENSORS_FEATURE_TEMP_MAX > == SENSORS_FEATURE_IN_MAX)... or not, I'm not sure yet. > > I'm curious how gnome sensors-applet and gkrellm managed to use the > current libsensors without chip-specific code at all, as it definitely > wasn't designed to be used that way. They both basically have there own version of sensors_get_feature_type, both assuming to be running on a 2.6 kernel, and thus have sysfs interface standard feature names. Converting them thus should be easy. (I wrote the gkrellm libsensors code myself, so I will probably also be the one converting it). Regards, Hans
