[Nut-upsdev] Some questions on driver implementation and variable names

[Henning Brauer]

* Carlos Rodrigues <carlos.efr at mail.telepac.pt> [2007-02-25 22:36]:
> On 2/25/07, Arjen de Korte <nut+devel at de-korte.org> wrote:
> >Based on made up 'information'. I'm not doubting your good intentions
> >here, but I'm quite worried that we're on a slippery slope. I'd rather
> >not present data if we're not sure it is reliable.

what makes you think the (not always present) calucation in the UPS 
firmware is any better?
your trust in embedded software is heart-warming, but totally 
contradicted by reality.

> I don't think it is even possible to calculate an accurate value,
> there are too many variables. However, if the function is chosen by
> the driver, it can be any function that gives a close enough
> approximation to the real thing, given the class of hardware it is
> driving.

yes, full ack.

> megatec.8 actually has a reference to the "bogosity" of the reported
> battery charge :)

and still, an approx battery charge is better than nothing.

> You are underestimating how important it is for the user to have
> values for this kind of stuff. Even if they are very inaccurate
> ballpark figures, the users need to know if their UPS is "almost fully
> charged", or "mostly discharged". Users don't think in terms of
> battery voltages, they think in percentage, even if that percentage is
> just a linear function on the battery voltage.

couldn't agree more.

-- 
Henning Brauer, hb at bsws.de, henning at openbsd.org
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam