On Feb 15, 2012, at 4:13 PM, William R. Elliot wrote: > Came across this note in section 4.8 of the developers guide before adding > FSD to the driver: > > Note > > upsd injects "FSD" by itself following that command by a master upsmon > process. Drivers must not set that value. > > Should I try it anyway as suggested?
It's worth a try, since your use case effectively does not have a NUT master - the "master" is another system entirely. If it works, we will want to update the documentation for that case. > Thanks, > > Bill > > At 08:13 AM 2/15/2012, Charles Lepple wrote: >> On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:10 PM, William R. Elliot wrote: >> >>> OK. Totally missed that I could send FSD as a status from the >>> driver...sorry. I'll give that a shot. >> >> Bill, >> >> Not a problem. I think you are breaking new ground here, but it's something >> that we should consider for other big UPS models. >> >> Arnaud, >> >> Have you had a chance to follow this discussion? Basically, it sounds like >> we have a gap in the shutdown mechanism if NUT is set up to monitor an UPS, >> but the force-shutdown command is sent to the UPS by another system which is >> not the NUT master. This would probably apply to Eaton's multi-user UPSes >> like those monitored by snmp-ups and the XML-based cards. >> >> top of the thread: >> http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c201202092250.q19MoEhE018871%40wreassoc.com%3e >> >> >> -- >> Charles Lepple >> clepple@gmail >> >> -- Charles Lepple clepple@gmail
_______________________________________________ Nut-upsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
