dmitriy.kazimirov/inxi
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/smxi/inxi.git synced 2024-11-16 16:21:39 +00:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

readme update

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Harald Hope 2018-04-11 15:20:27 -07:00
parent 16e70f6eb1
commit 1b189a9362
1 changed files with 128 additions and 117 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

245
README.txt
View file

@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ branch.
MASTER GIT BRANCH:
This is the only supported branch, and the current latest commit is
the only supported 'release'. There are no, and never will be,
any 'releases' of inxi beyond the current commit to master.
the only supported 'release'. There are NO 'releases' of inxi beyond
the current commit to master.
git clone https://github.com/smxi/inxi --branch master --single-branch
@ -17,29 +17,24 @@ wget -Nc https://github.com/smxi/inxi/raw/master/inxi
OR easy to remember shortcut (which redirects to github):
wget -Nc https://smxi.org/inxi
wget -Nc smxi.org/inxi
NOTE: I have deleted the master-plain branch to avoid confusion
since I've removed the legacy .gz files from the branch, which were
the only reasons for its existence.
I auto tag commits that I feel are somewhat complete at that stage
of the coding. There are NO releases, don't even dream of pretending
a tagged release holds any significance at all. I only added auto
tagging to get the maintainers to stop annoying me about tagging.
There is NO repeat NO meaning to the fact a commit is tagged. A tag
is a pointer to a commit, and has no further meaning.
A tag is a pointer to a commit, and has no further meaning.
Every current commit is the active release, all past commits are not
supported. Tagging has ZERO meaning, it's purely a formality that
certain distros can't figure out how to do without, that's all.
supported. Tagging is purely a formality that certain distros can't
figure out how to do without, that's all.
NOTE: JUST BECAUSE GITHUB CALLS MY TAGGED COMMITS 'RELEASES' DOES
NOT REPEAT NOT MEAN THEY ARE RELEASES!!! I can't change the words
on the tag page. They are tagged commmits, period. I did not want
to use tags precisely to avoid the idea that inxi has any release
that exists that is other than it's current master version, but I
decided that it was less pain to add tags than to argue this point
any further.
NOT MEAN THEY ARE RELEASES!!! I can't change the words on the tag page.
They are tagged commmits, period. I did not want to use tags precisely
to avoid the idea that inxi has any release that exists that is other
than it's current master version, but I decided that it was less pain
to add tags than to argue this point any further.
=====================================================================
DEVELOPMENT BRANCH:
@ -82,12 +77,13 @@ inxi already has. Also do not ask for support if your distro won't
update its inxi version, some are bad about that.
DOCUMENTATION: http://smxi.org/docs/inxi.htm
(smxi.org/docs/ is easier to remember, and is one click away from inxi.htm)
The one page wiki on github is only a pointer to the real resources.
(smxi.org/docs/ is easier to remember, and is one click away from
inxi.htm). The one page wiki on github is only a pointer to the real
resources.
https://github.com/smxi/inxi/tree/inxi-perl/docs
Contains specific Perl inxi documentation, of interest to developers
mostly. Includes internal inxi tools, values, configuration items.
Contains specific Perl inxi documentation, of interest mostly to
developers. Includes internal inxi tools, values, configuration items.
Also has useful information about Perl version support, including the
list of Core modules that _should_ be included in a distribution's
core modules, but which are unfortunately sometimes removed.
@ -101,8 +97,9 @@ ISSUES: https://github.com/smxi/inxi/issues
No issues accepted for non current inxi releases. See below for more on
that. Unfortunately as of 2.9, no support or issues can be accepted for
older inxi's because inxi 2.9 (Perl) and newer is a full rewrite, and
legacy inxi is not being supported since my time is finite (plus of course,
one reason for the rewrite was to never have to work with Gawk->Bash again!)
legacy inxi is not being supported since my time is finite (plus of
course, one reason for the rewrite was to never have to work with
Gawk->Bash again!)
SUPPORT FORUMS: http://techpatterns.com/forums/forum-33.html
This is the best place to place support issues that may be complicated.
@ -113,135 +110,149 @@ DEVELOPER FORUMS: http://techpatterns.com/forums/forum-32.html
SOURCE VERSION CONTROL: https://github.com/smxi/inxi
MAIN BRANCH: master
DEVELOPMENT BRANCHES: inxi-perl, one, two, three, android.
inxi-perl is the dev branch, the others are rarely if ever used. inxi itself
has the built in feature to be able to update itself from anywhere, including
these branches, which is very useful for development and debugging on various
user systems.
inxi-perl is the dev branch, the others are rarely if ever used. inxi
itself has the built in feature to be able to update itself from
anywhere, including these branches, which is very useful for development
and debugging on various user systems.
PULL REQUESTS: Please talk to me before starting to work on patches of any
reasonable complexity. inxi is hard to work on, and you have to understand how it
works before submitting patches, unless it's a trivial bug fix. Please:
NEVER even think about looking at or using previous inxi commits, previous to
the current master version, as a base for a patch. If you do, your patch / pull
request will probably be rejected. Developers, get your version from the
inxi-perl branch, pinxi, otherwise you may not be current to actual development
versions. inxi-perl pinxi is always equal to or ahead of master branch inxi.
PULL REQUESTS: Please talk to me before starting to work on patches of
any reasonable complexity. inxi is hard to work on, and you have to
understand how it works before submitting patches, unless it's a trivial
bug fix. Please: NEVER even think about looking at or using previous
inxi commits, previous to the current master version, as a base for a
patch. If you do, your patch / pull request will probably be rejected.
Developers, get your version from the inxi-perl branch, pinxi, otherwise
you may not be current to actual development versions. inxi-perl pinxi
is always equal to or ahead of master branch inxi.
inxi has one and only one release, and that is the current one (plus dev releases,
of course, but those should never be packaged). All previous releases are
immediately obsolete on the commit of every new release. There is no exception to
this, and never will be.
Man page updates, doc page updates, etc, of course, are easy and will probably
be accepted, as long as they are done according to the requirements.
Man page updates, doc page updates, etc, of course, are easy and will
probably be accepted, as long as they are done according to the
requirements.
inxi releases early, and releases often, when under development.
PACKAGERS: inxi has one and only one 'release', and that is the current
commit to master branch (plus pinxi inxi-perl branch, of course, but
those should never be packaged). All previous commits are immediately
obsolete on the commit of every new commit.
=====================================================================
ABOUT INXI - CORE COMMITMENT TO LONG TERM STABILITY
inxi is a command line system information tool. It was forked from the ancient
and mindbendingly perverse yet ingenius infobash, by locsmif.
inxi is a command line system information tool. It was forked from the
ancient and mindbendingly perverse yet ingenius infobash, by locsmif.
That was a buggy, impossible to update or maintain piece of software, so the
fork fixed those core issues, and made it flexible enough to expand the
utility of the original ideas. Locmsif has given his thumbs up to inxi, so
don't be fooled by legacy infobash stuff you may see out there.
That was a buggy, impossible to update or maintain piece of software,
so the fork fixed those core issues, and made it flexible enough to
expand the utility of the original ideas. Locmsif has given his thumbs
up to inxi, so don't be fooled by legacy infobash stuff you may see
out there.
inxi is lower case, except when I create a text header here in a file like
this, but it's always lower case. Sometimes to follow convention I will use
upper case inxi to start a sentence, but i find it a bad idea since
invariably, someone will repeat that and type it in as the command name, then
someone will copy that, and complain that the command: Inxi doesn't exist...
inxi is lower case, except when I create a text header here in a file
like this, but it's always lower case. Sometimes to follow convention
I will use upper case inxi to start a sentence, but i find it a bad
idea since invariably, someone will repeat that and type it in as the
command name, then someone will copy that, and complain that the
command: Inxi doesn't exist...
The primary purpose of inxi is for support, and sys admin use. inxi is used
widely for forum and IRC support, which is I believe it's most common function.
The primary purpose of inxi is for support, and sys admin use. inxi
is used widely for forum and IRC support, which is I believe it's most
common function.
If you are piping output to paste or post (or writing to file), inxi now
automatically turns off color codes, so the old suggestion to use -c 0 to
turn off colors is no longer required.
If you are piping output to paste or post (or writing to file), inxi
now automatically turns off color codes, so the old suggestion to
use -c 0 to turn off colors is no longer required.
inxi should always show you your current system state, as far as possible,
and should be more reliable than your own beliefs about what is in your system,
ideally. In other words, the goal in inxi is to have it be right more than it
is wrong about any system that it runs on. And not to rely on non current system
state data if at all possible. Some things, like memory/ram data, rely on
radically unreliable system self reporting based on OEM filling out data
inxi should always show you your current system state, as far as
possible, and should be more reliable than your own beliefs about
what is in your system, ideally. In other words, the goal in inxi
is to have it be right more than it is wrong about any system that
it runs on. And not to rely on non current system state data if at
all possible. Some things, like memory/ram data, rely on radically
unreliable system self reporting based on OEM filling out data
correctly, which doesn't often happen, so in those cases, you want to
confirm things like ram capacity with a reputable hardware source, like
crucial.com, which has the best ram hardware tool I know of.
confirm things like ram capacity with a reputable hardware source,
like crucial.com, which has the best ram hardware tool I know of.
The core mission of inxi is to always work on all systems all the time.
Well, all linux systems with the core tools inxi requires to operate
installed. Ie, not android, yet. What this means is this: you can have a 10
year old box, or probably 15, not sure, and you can install today's inxi on
it, and it will run. It won't run fast, but it will run. I test inxi on a
200 MHz laptop from about 1998 to keep it honest. That's also what was
used to optimize the code at some points, since differences appear as seconds,
not 10ths or 100ths of seconds on old systems like that.
The core mission of inxi is to always work on all systems all the
time. Well, all linux systems with the core tools inxi requires to
operate installed. Ie, not android, yet. What this means is this:
you can have a 10 year old box, or probably 15, not sure, and you
can install today's inxi on it, and it will run. It won't run fast,
but it will run. I test inxi on a 200 MHz laptop from about 1998
to keep it honest. That's also what was used to optimize the code at
some points, since differences appear as seconds, not 10ths or 100ths
of seconds on old systems like that.
inxi is being written, and tested, on Perl as old as 5.08, and will work on
any system that runs Perl 5.08 or later. Pre 2.9.0 Gawk/Bash inxi will also run
on any system no matter how old, within reason, so there should be no difference.
inxi is being written, and tested, on Perl as old as 5.08, and will
work on any system that runs Perl 5.08 or later. Pre 2.9.0 Gawk/Bash
inxi will also run on any system no matter how old, within reason,
so there should be no difference.
=====================================================================
BSD SUPPORT
BSD support is not as complete as GNU/Linux support due to the fact some of
the data simply is not available, or is structured in a way that makes it
unique to each BSD. This fragmentation makes supporting BSDs far more difficult
than it should be in the 21st century. The BSD support in inxi is an ongoing
process, with more features being added as new data sources and types are
discovered.
BSD support is not as complete as GNU/Linux support due to the fact
some of the data simply is not available, or is structured in a way
that makes it unique to each BSD. This fragmentation makes supporting
BSDs far more difficult than it should be in the 21st century. The
BSD support in inxi is an ongoing process, with more features being
added as new data sources and types are discovered.
All BSD issue reports unless trivial and obvious will require 1 of two things:
All BSD issue reports unless trivial and obvious will require 1 of
two things:
1. a full --debug 21 data dump so I don't have to spend days trying to get
the information I need to resolve the issue file by painful file from the
issue poster.
1. a full --debug 21 data dump so I don't have to spend days trying
to get the information I need to resolve the issue file by painful
file from the issue poster. This is only the start of the process,
and realistically requires 2. to complete it.
2. direct ssh access to at least a comparable live BSD version/system,
that is, if the issue is on a laptop, access has to be granted to the laptop,
or a similar one.
that is, if the issue is on a laptop, access has to be granted to the
laptop, or a similar one.
2 is far preferred because in terms of my finite time on this planet of ours,
the fact is, if I don't have direct (or SSH) access, I can't get much done,
and the little I can get done will take 10 to 1000x longer than it should.
That's my time spent (and sadly, with BSDs, largely lost), not yours.
Option 2 is far preferred because in terms of my finite time on this
planet of ours, the fact is, if I don't have direct (or SSH) access,
I can't get much done, and the little I can get done will take 10 to
1000x longer than it should. That's my time spent (and sadly, with
BSDs, largely lost), not yours.
I decided I have to adopt this much more strict policy with BSDs after wasting
untold hours on trying to get good BSD support, only to see that support break
a few years down the road as the data inxi relied in changed structure or syntax,
or the tools changed, or whatever else makes the BSDs such a challenge to support.
In the end, I realized, the only BSDs that are well supported are ones that I have
I decided I have to adopt this much more strict policy with BSDs
after wasting untold hours on trying to get good BSD support, only
to see that support break a few years down the road as the data inxi
relied in changed structure or syntax, or the tools changed, or
whatever else makes the BSDs such a challenge to support. In the end,
I realized, the only BSDs that are well supported are ones that I have
had direct access to for debugging and testing.
I will always accept patches that are well done, if they do not break GNU/Linux,
and extend BSD support, or add new BSD features, and follow the internal inxi
logic, and aren't too long. inxi sets initial internal flags to identify that
it is a BSD system vs a GNU/Linux system, and preloads some data structures
for BSD use, so make sure you understand what inxi is doing before you get
into it.
I will always accept patches that are well done, if they do not break
GNU/Linux, and extend BSD support, or add new BSD features, and follow
the internal inxi logic, and aren't too long. inxi sets initial internal
flags to identify that it is a BSD system vs a GNU/Linux system, and
preloads some data structures for BSD use, so make sure you understand
what inxi is doing before you get into it.
inxi will also start on Darwin, OSX's mutated version of a BSD, but my
conclusion about Darwin is that it is Unix in name only, and I will not spend
a second of my time adding any further support for that crippled broken
corporate pseudo-unix system. Don't ask, unless you are willing to pay my
normal professional wages.
inxi will also start on Darwin, OSX's mutated version of a BSD, but
my conclusion about Darwin is that it is Unix in name only, and I will
not spend a second of my time adding any further support for that
crippled broken corporate pseudo-unix system. Don't ask, unless you
are willing to pay my normal professional wages.
=====================================================================
INXI FEATURES AND FUNCTIONALITY
inxi's functionality continues to grow over time, but it's also important
to understand that each core new feature usually requires about 30 days work
to get it stable. So new features are not trivial things, nor is it acceptable
to submit a patch that works only on your personal system. One inxi feature
(-s, sensors data), took about 2 hours to get working in the alpha test on the
local dev system, but then to handle the massive chaos that is actual user
sensors output and system variations, it took several rewrites and about 30
days to get somewhat reliable for about 98% or so of inxi users. So if your
inxi's functionality continues to grow over time, but it's also
important to understand that each core new feature usually requires
about 30 days work to get it stable. So new features are not trivial
things, nor is it acceptable to submit a patch that works only on your
personal system. One inxi feature (-s, sensors data), took about
2 hours to get working in the alpha test on the local dev system, but
then to handle the massive chaos that is actual user sensors output
and system variations, it took several rewrites and about 30 days to
get somewhat reliable for about 98% or so of inxi users. So if your
patch is rejected, it's likely because you have not thought it through
adequately, have not done adequate testing cross system and platform, etc.
adequately, have not done adequate testing cross system and
platform, etc.
=====================================================================
INXI RELEASE/SUPPORT/ISSUES/BUGS INFORMATION: