mirror of
https://github.com/smxi/inxi.git
synced 2024-11-16 08:11:39 +00:00
349 lines
18 KiB
Plaintext
349 lines
18 KiB
Plaintext
README for inxi - a command line system information tool
|
|
|
|
The new Perl inxi is now here! File all issue reports with the master branch.
|
|
All support for versions prior to 3.0 is now ended, sorry.
|
|
|
|
Make sure to update to the current inxi from the master branch before filing
|
|
any issue reports. The code in pre 2.9 versions literally no longer exists in
|
|
inxi 3. Bugs from earlier versions cannot be solved in the new version since
|
|
the pre 2.9 and the 2.9 and later versions are completely different internally.
|
|
|
|
inxi strives to support the widest range of operating systems and hardware,
|
|
from the most simple consumer desktops, to the most advanced professional
|
|
hardware and servers.
|
|
|
|
The issues you post help maintain or expand that support, and are always
|
|
appreciated since user data and feedback is what keeps inxi working and
|
|
supporting the latest (or not so latest) hardware and operating systems.
|
|
|
|
See the BSD section below for qualifications re BSDs, and OSX in particular.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
MASTER BRANCH:
|
|
|
|
This is the only supported branch, and the current latest commit/version is
|
|
the only supported 'release'. There are no 'releases' of inxi beyond the
|
|
current commit/version in master. All past versions are not supported.
|
|
|
|
git clone https://github.com/smxi/inxi --branch master --single-branch
|
|
|
|
OR direct fast and easy install:
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
'Tagging' is purely a formality that certain distros can't figure out how to
|
|
do without, that's all. A tag is a pointer to a commit, and has no further
|
|
meaning.
|
|
|
|
NOTE: Just because github calls tagged commits 'Releases' does 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 the current master
|
|
version, but I decided that it was less pain to add tags than to argue this
|
|
point any further.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
DEVELOPMENT BRANCH:
|
|
All active development is now done on the inxi-perl branch (pinxi):
|
|
|
|
git clone https://github.com/smxi/inxi --branch inxi-perl --single-branch
|
|
|
|
OR direct fast and easy install:
|
|
wget -Nc https://github.com/smxi/inxi/raw/inxi-perl/pinxi
|
|
|
|
OR easy to remember shortcut (which redirects to github):
|
|
wget -Nc https://smxi.org/pinxi
|
|
wget -Nc smxi.org/pinxi
|
|
|
|
Once new features have been debugged, tested, and are stable, they will move
|
|
to the master branch.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
LEGACY BRANCH:
|
|
If you'd like to look at or check out the Gawk/Bash version of inxi, you can
|
|
find it here, at the inxi-legacy branch (binxi):
|
|
|
|
git clone https://github.com/smxi/inxi --branch inxi-legacy --single-branch
|
|
|
|
OR direct fast and easy install:
|
|
wget -Nc https://github.com/smxi/inxi/raw/inxi-legacy/binxi
|
|
|
|
OR easy to remember shortcut (which redirects to github):
|
|
wget -Nc https://smxi.org/binxi
|
|
|
|
This version will not be maintained, and it's unlikely that any time will be
|
|
spent on it in the future, but it is there in case it's of use or interest to
|
|
anyone.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
SUPPORT INFO:
|
|
|
|
Do not ask for basic help that reading the inxi -h / --help menus, or man page
|
|
would show you, and do not ask for features to be added that inxi already has.
|
|
Also do not ask for support if your distro won't update its inxi version, some
|
|
are bad about that.
|
|
|
|
DOCUMENTATION: https://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.
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/smxi/inxi/tree/inxi-perl/docs
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
HTML MAN PAGE: https://smxi.org/docs/inxi-man.htm
|
|
INXI OPTIONS PAGE: http://smxi.org/docs/inxi-options.htm
|
|
NOTE: These may not always be up to date, but generally track the most recent
|
|
inxi commits.
|
|
|
|
ISSUES: https://github.com/smxi/inxi/issues
|
|
No issues accepted for non current inxi versions. 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 our time here on earth is finite (plus of course, one
|
|
reason for the rewrite was to never have to work with Gawk->Bash again!).
|
|
|
|
SUPPORT FORUMS: https://techpatterns.com/forums/forum-33.html
|
|
This is the best place to place support issues that may be complicated.
|
|
|
|
If you are developer, use:
|
|
DEVELOPER FORUMS: https://techpatterns.com/forums/forum-32.html
|
|
|
|
SOURCE VERSION CONTROL: https://github.com/smxi/inxi
|
|
MAIN BRANCH: master
|
|
DEVELOPMENT BRANCHES: inxi-perl, one, two
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Man page updates, doc page updates, etc, of course, are easy and will probably
|
|
be accepted, as long as they are properly formatted and logically coherent.
|
|
|
|
When under active development, inxi releases early, and releases often.
|
|
|
|
PACKAGERS: inxi has one and only one 'release', and that is the current
|
|
commit/version in the master branch (plus pinxi inxi-perl branch, of course,
|
|
but those should never be packaged).
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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...
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
The core mission of inxi is to always work on all systems all the time. Well,
|
|
all 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.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
BSD SUPPORT
|
|
|
|
Real BSDs:
|
|
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:
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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 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.
|
|
|
|
OSX:
|
|
Do not insult real BSDs by calling OSX a BSD. OSX is the least Unix-like
|
|
operating system I've ever seen that claims to be a Unix, its tools are
|
|
mutated, it's data randomly and non-standardly organized, and it totally fails
|
|
to respect the 'spirit' of Unix, even though it might pass some random tests
|
|
that certify a system as a 'Unix'.
|
|
|
|
If you want me to use my time on OSX features or issues, you have to pay me,
|
|
because Apple is all about money, not freedom (that's what the 'free' in 'free
|
|
software' is referring to, not cost), and I'm not donating my finite time in
|
|
support of non-free operating systems.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
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 patch is
|
|
rejected, it's likely because you have not thought it through adequately, have
|
|
not done adequate testing cross system and platform, etc.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
INXI VERSION/SUPPORT/ISSUES/BUGS INFORMATION:
|
|
|
|
Important: the only version of inxi that is supported is the latest current
|
|
master branch version/commit. No issue reports or bug reports will be accepted
|
|
for anything other than current master branch. No merges, attempts to patch old
|
|
code from old versions, will be considered or accepted. If you are not updated
|
|
to the latest inxi, do not file a bug report since it's probably been fixed
|
|
ages ago. If your distro isn't packaging a current inxi, then file a bug report
|
|
with them, not here. The only valid working code base for inxi is the current
|
|
master branch commit of inxi.
|
|
|
|
Distributions should never feel any advantage comes from using old inxi
|
|
versions because inxi has as a core promise to you, the end user, that it will
|
|
never require new tools to run. New tools may be required for a new feature,
|
|
but that will always be handled internally by inxi, and will not cause any
|
|
operational failures. This is a promise, and I will never as long as I run this
|
|
project violate that core inxi requirement. Old inxi is NOT more stable than
|
|
current inxi, it's just old, and lacking in bug fixes and features. For pre 2.9
|
|
versions, it's also significantly slower, and with fewer features.
|
|
|
|
inxi is 'rolling release' software, just like Debian Sid, Gentoo, or Arch Linux
|
|
are rolling release GNU/Linux distributions, with no 'release points'.
|
|
|
|
Your distro not updating inxi ever, then failing to show something that is
|
|
fixed in current inxi is not a bug, and please do not post it here. File the
|
|
issue with your distro, not here. Updating inxi in a package pool will NEVER
|
|
make anything break or fail, period. It has no version based dependencies, just
|
|
software, like Perl 5.xx, lspci, etc. There is never a valid reason to not
|
|
update inxi in a package pool of any distro in the world (with one single known
|
|
exception, the Slackware based Puppy Linux release, which ships without the
|
|
full Perl language. The Debian based one works fine).
|
|
|
|
Sys Admin type inxi users always get the first level of support. ie, convince
|
|
us you run real systems and networks, and your issue shoots to the top of the
|
|
line. As do any real bugs. Failure to supply requested debugger data will lead
|
|
to a distinct lack of interest on our part to help you with a bug. ie, saying,
|
|
oh, it doesn't work, doesn't cut it, unless it's obvious why.
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
|
|
INXI VERSION NUMBERING:
|
|
|
|
inxi uses 'semantic' version numbering, where the version numbers actually mean
|
|
something.
|
|
|
|
The version number follows these guidelines:
|
|
Using example 3.2.28-6
|
|
|
|
The first digit(s), "3", is a major version, and almost never changes. Only a
|
|
huge milestone, or if inxi reaches 3.9.xx, when it will simply move up to 4.0.0
|
|
just to keep it clean, would cause a change.
|
|
|
|
The second digit(s), "2", means a new real feature has been added. Not a
|
|
tweaked existing feature, an actual new feature, which usually also has a new
|
|
argument option letter attached. The second number goes from 0 to 9, and then
|
|
rolls over the first after 9. It could also be adding a very complicated
|
|
expansion of existing features, like Wayland. It depends.
|
|
|
|
The third, "28", is for everything small, can cover bug fixes, tweaks to
|
|
existing features to add support for something, pretty much anything where you
|
|
want the end user to know that they are not up to date. The third goes from 0
|
|
to 99, then rolls over the second.
|
|
|
|
The fourth, "6", is extra information about certain types of inxi updates. I
|
|
don't usually use this last one in master branch, but you will see it in
|
|
branches one,two, inxi-perl, inxi-legacy since that is used to confirm remote
|
|
test system patch version updates.
|
|
|
|
The fourth number, when used, will be alpha-numeric, a common version would be,
|
|
in say, branch one: 2.2.28-b1-02, in other words: branch 1 patch version 2.
|
|
|
|
In the past, now and then the 4th, or 'patch', number, was used in trunk/master
|
|
branches of inxi, but I've pretty much stopped doing that because it's
|
|
confusing.
|
|
|
|
inxi does not use the fiction of date based versioning because that imparts no
|
|
useful information to the end user, when you look at say, 2.2.28, and you last
|
|
had 2.2.11, you can know with some certainty that inxi has no major new
|
|
features, just fine tunings and bug fixes. And if you see one with 2.3.2, you
|
|
will know that there is a new feature, almost, but not always, linked to one or
|
|
more new line output items. Sometimes a fine tuning can be quite significant,
|
|
sometimes it's a one line code fix.
|
|
|
|
A move to a new full version number, like the rewrite of inxi to Perl, would
|
|
reflect in first version say, 2.9.01, then after a period of testing, where
|
|
most little glitches are fixed, a move to 3.0.0. These almost never happen. I
|
|
do not expect for example version 4.0 to ever happen after 3.0 (early 2018),
|
|
unless so many new features are added that it actually hits 3.9, then it would
|
|
roll over to 4.
|
|
|
|
### EOF ###
|