On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 02:16:00PM +0200, Erwan Velu wrote: > Looks like this email wasn't really popular :) > I don't know how to have a reliable parsing of dmi structures out of > dmidecode which doesn't offer any guarantee on the output. > WDYT about having a JSON output ? I don't take any issue with that approach. Do you have a patch to propose? Neil
> Smartmontools is on the way to change on this point ;)) > Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 16:00, Erwan Velu <erwanalia...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > Hi folks, > > > > That's almost an endless story but I'm back one more time with almost > > the same idea/need. > > I'm currently developing a tool for doing some consistency check for > > clusters and reporting the hardware configuration is obviously one of > > these tasks to perform. > > I'm trying to compare nodes between themselves but also against a > > "definition" of them. > > > > I'll be part of a GO tooling so I need to do my stuff in go. > > > > So what are the solutions for a third party tool to get __accurate__ > > dmi information from a system ? > > > > I found a couple of GO libraries which are all outdated or just try to > > parse the string output of dmidecode. Both of them are not really > > satisfying. I could also use lshw which have dmi support but much less > > accurate than dmidecode, which is to my opinion, the most up-to-date > > opensource tool to get DMI information. > > > > As dmidecode is where the vendor contributes but is also the most used > > DMI tooling, why not having at least a machine-readable format output > > (like json) to ease the parsing output of dmidecode ? That would made > > our (3rd party tooling) lives much easier. > > > > Thx ! > > > > Erwan, > > _______________________________________________ > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dmidecode-devel _______________________________________________ https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dmidecode-devel
