Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 213304
GKrellM/libsensors combo borked on VIA 686
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:47 EST
Description of problem:
The patch that adds libsensors support to 2.2.9 uses the name of a sensor to
determine its type. Specifically, it expects all voltage sensors to have
names like in0, in1, etc.
Unfortunately, for VIA 686 chips (and possible others) libsensors
"automagically" returns a human-readable name, which is supposed to be
compatible with the 2.4 kernel names. When GKrellM enumerates the sensors
on my system, it gets 2.0V, 2.5V, 3.3V, 5.0V, and 12V -- rather than in0,
in1, in2, in3, in4. Needless to say, GKrellM has no idea what to make of
these sensor names.
I've posted about this on the lm_sensors mailing list. The response that I
received indicated that lm_sensors 2.11.0 will provide a new API to access
the "normalized" names. The behavior of the existing API will not be changed.
Fortunately, GKrellM 2.2.10 has built-in libsensors support (no patch needed).
Moreover, it provides a --without-libsensors command line switch which makes
it revert to reading the sysfs files directly, which will work around the
Please, can we have GKrellM 2.2.10 in FE6? :-)
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
Thanks for reporting this and sorry for the long silence I've been rather busy.
2.2.10 is currently in development / rawhide, you can grab it from there.
The --without-libsensors cmdline options is nice, but not really a solution,
I'll write a patch for the libsensors support to also recognise the odd-named
voltages on the VIA 686. I'll get back to you via this bug once this patch is in
development so that you can test it before I push 2.2.10 + this patch to FC-6.
No problem. Been using 2.2.10 since I saw your note on fedora-devel. Working
fine with --without-libsensors.
I wouldn't bother hacking gkrellm to recognize the weird sensor names that
libsensors is reporting; that way lies madness. I'd wait until the lm_sensors
folks create their new API and use that.
(In reply to comment #2)
> No problem. Been using 2.2.10 since I saw your note on fedora-devel. Working
> fine with --without-libsensors.
> I wouldn't bother hacking gkrellm to recognize the weird sensor names that
> libsensors is reporting; that way lies madness. I'd wait until the lm_sensors
> folks create their new API and use that.
I believe that the VIA 686 voltages are the only exception, but I agree if more
exceptions pop up then we should not support those all, as that way indeed lies
2.2.10-2 should show up on a mirror near you soon, can you please test that to
see if it works without using --without-libsensors (so --with-libsensors