Yes, I did mean the vendor list portion only. Ok, I'll put together the 'diff -up' output and post it to the '.org' list this weekend for review. I figure (for now) this will be a one-time contribution, since I gather that the standard it's based on, doesn't change that often. Tom Gibson -----Original Message----- From: Jean Delvare [mailto:khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 11:59 PM To: Thomas Gibson Cc: lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Updated 'decode-dimms' using JEP106AB Publication. Hi Thomas, On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 05:28:37 +0000, Thomas Gibson wrote: > I am a Manufacturing Test Engineer at Silver Peak Systems in Santa Clara, CA. We have been testing DIMMS from various vendors for some boxes we plan to use in the future. As a result, we discovered that the 'decode-dimms' available on your website was fairly old and not up to date as a result. > > I recently updated the 'decode-dimms' version that your archive provides, with information from the JEP106AB Publication from http://www.softnology.biz/files.html Web site. > > I was curious if you would like me to checkin this updated version? If so, please let me know what procedure I should follow to do so. By "out of date", I assume that you refer to the vendor list only, not the whole script? Yes, we are interested in your changes. Please post them to the linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx list as unified patches (as generated by diff -up), where they will be reviewed and applied. We will only create a committer account for you if your contributions are good and if you intend to be a regular contributor. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
