I've put up a beta3 release. http://ftp.gluster.com/pub/freeipmi/qa-release/freeipmi-0.8.0.beta3.tar.gz
Changes from beta 2: Fixed portability issues for netbsd. Fixed some config file bugs. Fixed some OEM-isms. Al On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 14:44 -0700, Al Chu wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I've put up a beta2 release here: > > http://ftp.gluster.com/pub/freeipmi/qa-release/freeipmi-0.8.0.beta2.tar.gz > > Changes from beta 1: > > I've modified the ipmi-sel output so there are only 2 levels of > verbosity (former level 1 verbosity is now default). > > Fixed some output corner cases. > > Added --tail to ipmi-sel. > > Fixed a shared sensors corner case. > > Al > > On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 13:35 -0700, Al Chu wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I've put up a beta release of FreeIPMI 0.8.1.beta1 here: > > > > http://ftp.gluster.com/pub/freeipmi/qa-release/freeipmi-0.8.0.beta1.tar.gz > > > > I'd appreciate any testing, input, etc. from people. There are a few > > feature changes that I would like to get some input on. I am open to > > changing, reverting, or adjusting based on user input. Attached to the > > e-mail is the official NEWS release that lists all the changes in > > glorious detail. > > > > New ipmi-sensors/ipmi-sel/ipmimonitoring default output: > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > > The default output of ipmi-sensors, ipmi-sel, and ipmimonitoring has > > been modified for easier readability and consistency to each other. > > Some information is not output but by default anymore and is available > > through new options or increased verbosity. A variety of new options > > are available for alternate outputs too. > > > > A) Do people like the new output format? Is it easier to read (which is > > my primary goal)? > > > > B) Are there any options like --entity-sensor-names, > > --no-sensor-type-output, --non-abbreviated-units, etc. that people think > > should be default rather than an option? > > > > C) Is there an output that should be default instead, or have an option > > to give an alternate output? > > > > D) Does the --legacy-output option not fully maintain backwards > > compatability and break anybody's scripts?? > > > > Things I would appreciate testing on > > ------------------------------------ > > > > I'd appreciate people trying them out on their systems to make sure > > everything still outputs fine and I make any new corner cases. I'm > > particularly interested in ensuring I didn't break: > > > > A) The --bridge-sensors options on ipmi-sensors and ipmimonitoring > > > > B) Multirecords outputs on ipmi-fru. > > > > C) Workarounds, most notably the Intel workarounds > > > > D) The new ipmi-dcmi tool, which I have not been able to fully vet due > > to lack of a system. > > > > Any feedback would be appreciated before I release. > > > > Thanks, > > Al > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Freeipmi-devel mailing list > > freeipmi-de...@gnu.org > > http://*lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel > -- Albert Chu ch...@llnl.gov Computer Scientist High Performance Systems Division Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory _______________________________________________ Freeipmi-users mailing list Freeipmi-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-users
