Al - The sample man page looks much improved over the old stuff, thanks.
The "header comments" also seem like a step in the right direction. In addition to what you mention: # This section is for configuring blah blah blah. # For most systems you want to configure blah blah blah. a comment or two like: # blah blah blah lets you set the serial port parameters and # must be changed in coordination with the bleh bleh bleh. would aid in navigating/tying the IPMI space together... ;;peter Al Chu wrote: > Hey Peter, > >> Perhaps what is needed is a wiki or some such where real world >> problem/solutions examples can accumulate? > > For FreeIPMI 0.5.0, I've been adding a lot of additional information to > the FreeIPMI manpages. For example: > > --- > GENERAL USE > Most users of bmc-config will want to: > > A) Run bmc-config with --checkout to get a copy of the current > BMC configuration and store it in a file. The standard output > can be redirected to a file or a file can be specified with the > --filename option. > > B) Edit the configuration file with an editor. See bmc- > config.conf(5) for information on what the fields in the configuration > file mean. > > C) Commit the configuration back to the BMC using the --commit > option and specifying the configuration file with the --filename > option. > > For users with large clusters or sets of nodes, you may wish to > use the same configuration file for all nodes. The one problem > with this is that the IP address and MAC address will be > different on each node in your cluster and thus can't be configured > through the same config file. The IP address and MAC address in > your config file may be overwritten on the command line using > --key-pair option. The following example could be used in a > script to configure each node in a cluster with the same BMC config > file. The script only needs to determine the correct IP address > and MAC address to use. > > # bmc-config --commit -k Lan_Conf:Ip_Address=$MY_IP -k > Lan_Conf:Mac_Address=$MY_MAC -f my_bmc.conf > --- > > Hopefully text like that will get users going where-as it may have been > more confusing before. I also have pointers to bmc-config.conf(5) > (whereas there wasn't a pointer before, so most would not have seen the > manpage). There are also trouble-shooting sections for generic issues. > I don't currently have a bmc-config specific trouble-shooting section. > Do you think that would be useful? What kind of stuff do you think > should be in it? > > Another thought I've had is adding additional sectional "header > comments" into the sections bmc-config checkout. So for example: > > # > # Section LAN_Conf > # > # This section is for configuring blah blah blah. For most > # systems you want to configure blah blah blah. > Section LAN_Conf > ... > EndSection > > So that might give the user additional help in setting up their system. > Do you think that would really help? > >> Where can a user find out if their machine supports SOL, and what >> could they do with it if it did? (rhetorical question, but was real >> for me once.) > > Hmmm. That's a far harder question. Outside of a specific list, I'm > not really sure what could be done. Some vendors in the past have said > they support IPMI when they don't. :-) > > Al > > On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 15:24 -0700, Peter Broadwell wrote: >> This is understandable. >> Loosing the commented template is sad however. >> >> Perhaps what is needed is a wiki or some such where real world >> problem/solutions examples can accumulate? >> >> Where can a user find out if their machine supports SOL, and what >> could they do with it if it did? >> (rhetorical question, but was real for me once.) >> >> ;;peter >> >> >> Al Chu wrote: >>> I had begun working on a template to store in the docs directory, with >>> comments throughout the file to inform the user of what they should >>> configure on their own. >>> >>> However, with so many different BMCs and vendor implementations out >>> there, a substantial portion of the default template will fail for >>> different users and different hardware. I think that will simply cause >>> confusion. For example, a user may believe they have SOL configured >>> properly when their machine may not support SOL. >>> >>> I'm more inclined to let the user run --checkout on their own, since it >>> will allow the user to configure exactly what is available for their >>> machine. It is the model that LLNL and most users of FreeIPMI (that >>> I've spoken to) follow. >>> >>> So for the time being, I've removed bmc-autoconfig. If it can be >>> revamped to handle SOL, varying number of users, passwords, varying BMC >>> implementations, etc. I think we can add it back in. >>> >>> Al >>> >>> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 10:14 -0700, Al Chu wrote: >>>> I have been working with a user on a BMC config issue with their >>>> machine. I'm now disinclined to support the committing of a default >>>> template. >>>> >>>> 1) Many different machines support different configuration options. >>>> Included in this are: ipmi 1.5 only options vs ipmi 2.0 options vs. >>>> optionally supported options vs. newer errata options vs. flat out >>>> unsupported options. So do we support the full template (so most >>>> options will fail by default) or do we support a minimal template (most >>>> options aren't listed). >>>> >>>> 2) Due to the IP address and MAC address being required for modification >>>> (and likely subnet + gateway too), at minimum, the user must edit the >>>> template anyways, we cannot create a default template that will work >>>> without modification. >>>> >>>> I think the better idea is to store a template in the docs location and >>>> mention it in the bmc-config manpage. I have also written into the bmc- >>>> config manpage some general use instructions, so they know they should >>>> run --checkout to create a config template first. >>>> >>>> Any thoughts? >>>> >>>> Al >>>> >>>> On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 11:18 -0700, Anand Babu Periasamy wrote: >>>>> Hi Al, >>>>> I am thinking, if we produce $prefix/etc/freeipmi/bmc-config.conf with >>>>> fully documented options and default values, bmc-autoconfig's goal can >>>>> be achieved. Additionally it can be used for automation too. >>>>> bmc-config will use this config file if none is specified through the >>>>> command line argument. Then we can get rid of bmc-autoconfig. What do >>>>> you think? >>>>> >>>>> Al Chu writes: >>>>> >>>>>> I just thought of this. We could also distribute a common template file >>>>>> as part of FreeIPMI and install it in the docs dir? I guess my semi- >>>>>> argument against this is the fact that we've (practically) already >>>>>> distributed a template file with the bmc-config.conf(5) manpage. So >>>>>> would there be a need? >>>>>> >>>>>> What are people's thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> Al >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 11:01 -0700, Peter Broadwell wrote: >>>>>>> I have need to configure many machines at the same time and if the >>>>>>> templateing >>>>>>> file was documented this tool might become the one of choice for such >>>>>>> uses. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ;;peter >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anand Babu Periasamy wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Al, >>>>>>>> * It is still maintained. >>>>>>>> * BMC-Autoconfig is not a GUI wizard for bmc-config. It is supposed to >>>>>>>> ask minimum questions from the user and automatically configure the >>>>>>>> BMC with known defaults. It is intended for users without any >>>>>>>> knowledge of IPMI to quickly get a basic working setup. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * It does enable LAN and configure NULL, admin, operator and ipmiuser >>>>>>>> accounts. See the template file, you will get an idea what all it >>>>>>>> configures. >>>>>>>> If you have suggestions to improve, let us know? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Albert Chu writes: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm thinking of dropping this from FreeIPMI: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A) It doesn't seem to be maintained by the original authors. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> B) It apparenly only configures 3 fields of the BMC. No users, lan >>>>>>>>> enabling, etc. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't really see the use anymore. Any comments? Anyone out there >>>>>>>>> using >>>>>>>>> this? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Al >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Albert Chu >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> 925-422-5311 >>>>>> Computer Scientist >>>>>> High Performance Systems Division >>>>>> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory _______________________________________________ Freeipmi-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-users
