freeipmi-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Question regarding windows version


From: Albert Chu
Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Question regarding windows version
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 09:54:18 -0800

> How does this is ported with Cygwin ? (or is it ported ?)

I ported it to Cygwin but naturally the only thing that could be tested
was out of band communication.  In band communication was untested.

> Is it possible to get-rid of those drivers in a first porting effort,
> or is it a required part of the project ?

If you don't care about inband communication, it really isn't necessary
to port it.   It could simply be #ifdef'd out.  Hypothetically a
configure option for "--no-inband" could be made.

As Patrick said, ipmiutil uses a Windows based driver.  So I assume
there is a way to add a "Windows driver" into FreeIPMI to use.
Presently there is a KCS driver (w/ ports to work on Linux & BSD), SSIF
driver, OpenIPMI (/dev/ipmi0 on many Linux systems), and SunBMC (for
Solaris).  There's no reason we can't add "WinIntel" or something.  B/c
I don't have a Windows system to try on, I've just never been able to
add anything for Windows.

Al


On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 11:46 +0000, Patrick Schmidt - Krämer IT Solutions
wrote:
> You know ipmiutil uses the Intel IPMI Driver for hardware level stuff.
> It is also open source, so some main things could be found out by
> looking at their source.
> 
> 
> 
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen
> 
> Patrick Schmidt
> M.Sc
> Kommunikationsinformatik
> 
> Krämer IT Solutions GmbH
> Tel.: 0 68 81 / 9 36 29 - 72
> Fax: 0 68 81 / 9 36 29 - 99
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden 
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 11:49
> An: address@hidden; address@hidden
> Cc: Patrick Schmidt - Krämer IT Solutions; address@hidden
> Betreff: RE: [Freeipmi-devel] Question regarding windows version
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I have indeed quickly tried to build FreeIPMI a while ago with MinGW.
> We choose MinGW to avoid DLL dependencies (and so get-rid of Cygwin
> licenses concerns) and because it can be cross compiled on Linux.
> Unsurprisingly, It has failed very quickly in many ways. I tried to
> hack the code to make it a bit further but it appears that it needs
> quite a bit of work to make it build entirely. So I give up by lack of
> time.
> Anyway, beside the lack of time, what I fear when porting projects
> like FreeIPMI is low level hardware access. I don't know much about
> IPMI in general and FreeIPMI in particular, but I have read the word
> "driver" somewhere in the code. Porting ioctl() calls is not trivial
> and might require to use the WDK (Windows Driver Kit) which is another
> story.
> How does this is ported with Cygwin ? (or is it ported ?) Is it
> possible to get-rid of those drivers in a first porting effort, or is
> it a required part of the project ?
> 
> Regards,
> Fred
> 
> --
> Eaton Opensource Team - http://opensource.eaton.com
> 
> 
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Arnaud Quette address@hidden
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 10:45 AM
> To: Albert Chu
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; Bohe, Frederic
> Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Question regarding windows version
> 
> Hi Al,
> 
> I'm adding Fred (the team member I mentioned before) to start discussing more 
> technically.
> He will argument on mingw interest, and will try to provide a first feedback 
> on what is going wrong.
> 
> What I'd like to see emerging is a plan that involve at least you (Al), Fred 
> and I to speed up this port, if we find it can be addressed in a suitable and 
> timely fashion...
> 
> cheers,
> Arnaud
> --
> Engineering Linux/Unix Expert - Opensource Solutions Lead - Eaton - 
> http://opensource.eaton.com NUT (Network UPS Tools) Project Leader - 
> http://www.networkupstools.org Debian Developer - http://www.debian.org Free 
> Software Developer - http://arnaud.quette.fr
> 
> 2012/12/5 Albert Chu <address@hidden<mailto:address@hidden>>
> > It's great to see that this thread is still alive.
> > I've some Windows server that are IPMI capable, under the hand.
> > And I'm seriously considering the option of a mingw port of FreeIPMI, 
> > and would be pouring some resources into this effort.
> > A member of my team very quickly tried a compilation, but it has been 
> > so miserably failing that he thrown the towel almost instantly...
> >
> > So, would you be considering a mingw effort?
> > How could we help and synchronize?
> 
> I hadn't heard of mingw until now, so I'll have to look at that at some point.
> 
> Awhile back I made sure that FreeIPMI would compile under cygwin, but my 
> Windows box didn't have IPMI and I left it at the "if it compiles, I'll 
> assume it works" stage.  Longer term, I am more interested in it working 
> "natively".
> 
> I'm very amenable to patches from the community to simply support a Windows 
> build.  We can iterate over them on the mailing list, or if someone out there 
> wants to discuss steps to move forward before pouring in effort, that's cool 
> too.
> 
> I guess I'm not entirely sure of the steps in the right direction.  I don't 
> have experience developing Windows applications natively, and w/o a box to 
> test/play on, I sort of can't start learning/fiddling.
> 
> Al
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 20:10 +0100, Arnaud Quette wrote:
> > Hi Albert and the list,
> >
> > 2012/12/5 Albert Chu <address@hidden<mailto:address@hidden>>
> >         Hi Patrick,
> >
> >         > first of all your tool is really awesome. I like the concept
> >         and
> >         > respect the effort you guys are putting into development.
> >         Since
> >         > Release you are constantly updating this tool and making it
> >         better.
> >
> >         Thanks
> >
> > I'm seconding Patrick. And especially you Al, you are doing an awesome 
> > work with FreeIPMI!
> >
> >
> >         > I have one little question. We are having many Windows Based
> >         Systems
> >         > here, so there is no chance I can use and benefit from
> >         freeipmi. So my
> >         > question is if you have ever considered to do an windows
> >         version of
> >         > free ipmi. There is only one tool available “ipmiutil” that
> >         supports
> >         > windows, it is also open source, but lacks some relevant
> >         things.  I
> >         > would be please to use your free ipmi tool on a windows
> >         machine.
> >
> >         I personally wouldn't mind trying to get FreeIPMI to work in
> >         Windows,
> >         however I've never had access to Windows running on an IPMI
> >         capable
> >         server.  It's something my company just doesn't do.
> >
> >         So I just don't have the capability to do it.  I have always
> >         hoped that
> >         someone from the community would be able to add support.
> >
> > It's great to see that this thread is still alive.
> > I've some Windows server that are IPMI capable, under the hand.
> > And I'm seriously considering the option of a mingw port of FreeIPMI, 
> > and would be pouring some resources into this effort.
> > A member of my team very quickly tried a compilation, but it has been 
> > so miserably failing that he thrown the towel almost instantly...
> >
> > So, would you be considering a mingw effort?
> > How could we help and synchronize?
> >
> > cheers,
> > Arnaud
> >
> > --
> > NUT (Network UPS Tools) Project Leader - 
> > http://www.networkupstools.org Debian Developer - 
> > http://www.debian.org Free Software Developer - 
> > http://arnaud.quette.fr
> >
> --
> Albert Chu
> address@hidden<mailto:address@hidden>
> Computer Scientist
> High Performance Systems Division
> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Freeipmi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
-- 
Albert Chu
address@hidden
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]