On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Arjen de Korte wrote: > Citeren Daniel O'Connor <[email protected]>: > > PS the battery.date is odd, ie > > battery.date: 1988/00/39 > > battery.mfr.date: 2008/12/08 > > Most likely, this is a bug in the UPS firmware. This value is set by > the HID path
I'm shocked to hear you say that ;) > UPS.Battery.APCBattReplaceDate, Type: Feature, ReportID: 0x1c, > Offset: 0, Size: 24, Value: 14728.000000 > > The reported value here (an APC specific one) should be a > hexadecimal-as-decimal format like observed on other APC devices. > However, APC seems to be using the standard way of encoding the date > as written in the USB HID PDC specification and which is used for > > UPS.ManufacturerDate, Type: Feature, ReportID: 0x7b, Offset: 0, > Size: 16, Value: 14728.000000 > UPS.Battery.ManufacturerDate, Type: Feature, ReportID: 0x20, > Offset: 0, Size: 16, Value: 14728.000000 > > which translate to 'ups.mfr.date' and 'battery.mfr.date' > respectively. Note the difference in the size. The latter two > correctly use 16 bits (as specified), but the first uses 24 bits > (which is too much). OK, so it needs another entry for this particular UPS? I wonder if there is some more general way of detecting this particular implementation.. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Nut-upsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
