>> Example: put in some wget based thingy, which goes to some (fixed) web
>> site, searches for (some extracted or Tillie composed string) which
>> describes the hardware (bound to have been bought as-is and never
>> opened), pulls down a set of config files and heuristics to determine
>> between them (look at BIOS, or 'that model will always show this or that
>> in the PCI table') and guesses the correct (initial) config as tested by
>> some other user.
>
> Meaning you'll continue to be six months behind the curve, and fail every
> time Dell tweaks its laptop layout. (Dell does things like switch sound
> chips without switching model numbers ALL THE TIME.)
>
> Are you volunteering to maintain this database?
No, noone 'maintains' it; I actually /meant/ search.
So if you run it on a Redhat distribution, it goes queries
redhat first, then lists
IBM T23 - Alex Bligh
IBM T23 new version - Rob Landley
...
etc.
IE is the minimum amount of automation to simulate typing the thing
into google. (the advantage of doing this over using google
alone is that X may not be working at this stage and lynx
might daunt Aunt Tillie).
Obviously you will need some magic tag at the top of a config
file to make it easilly identifiable to search engines. And no
doubt some fools will fill files with crap.
> So no-name assembled white boxes from e-machines and stuff wouldn't be
> supported?
Correct; I'm sure the probing configurator has a place too.
> Have you TRIED the current auto-configurator?
No, to be honest. However, now you have set me the challenge, I'll
report back on how well or otherwise it works.
> Assuming every IBM T23 has the same hardware in it, which oddly enough is
> a bit of a gamble. (OK, IBM is better at this than Dell, largely due to
> inventory management reasons.) And assuming the finite number of
> database maintainers has yet bought an IBM T23, and that the rest of the
> world can wait until then.
Well, you'd wait until either your distro vendor had done one, or
someone else had posted one and it had reached search-engine
du-jour.
> Requiring live network access for the autoconfigurator to work is one
> heck of an extra requirement, though. Most of the world is still using
> dialup, you know...
True.
>> And Aunt Tillie (apart from the module changes whatever)
>> can be using the kernel version etc. from their distro (recompiled),
>> rather than the latest 2.[2468].xx with lots of new bugs^Wunwanted
>> fixes in.
>
> You want to write some other tool.
Perhaps you are right.
> Giacamo and Eric started work on the autoprobe as a way to reduce the
> number of questions the configurator showed people by eliminating
> hardware that they provably do not have, and defaulting the stuff they
> DO have to on. But it turns out that on any relatively recent machine,
> it's an easy enough problem that you can autoprobe EVERYTHING and build
> straight from that. So the Linux kernel could finally do "configure;
> make; make install".
>
> I consider that a neat hack.
Sure I agree, if it works; my speculation is that it doesn't, if one
boots with a default vendor kernel, on many machines. I would love
to be proved wrong, so rather than debate further here, I have another
T23 to set up so I'll boot it up from scratch, run the configurator,
and see what happens.
-- Alex Bligh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/