[Nut-upsdev] updating the NUT website

hyouko at gmail.com hyouko at gmail.com
Tue Jun 14 00:10:17 UTC 2016

> I will try to remember to update the list of unsupported characters.


> Hmm, I will have to look at some of the dependencies - the "Last updated" dates aren't getting modified. (I am just doing a "make" (all) rather than "make dist" since I don't have a new NUT tarball or the GPG key.)

What do we want to do with 'Last updated' and 'Version' in footers?
I mean, when not working in a virgin repo, it may happen that targets
are newer than prerequisites and therefore not rebuilt... which leaves
us with mixed dates (not a big problem, after all) and versions (which
annoy me the most).
Plus, at the moment, pages built directly by 'nut-website' get their
version from the last tag in NUT (minus the additional infos about the
commit, e.g. 2.7.4), protocols don't get any version at all (but their
own, if set), while pages under 'nut' submodule get their version from
NUT's 'configure.ac' (e.g.

If I recall correctly, in a previous topic you mentioned reproducible
builds and proposed to save version in a file.
With that in mind, I think we could do something like this:
- in 'nut-website' repo: store the output of `git describe --tags`
(done on 'nut' submodule, without removing commit infos) in a
git-ignored file, but only if that file doesn't exist or version is
not the same, and then add that file as a prerequisite to every file:
each page will then get the same (most recent NUT) version but its own
timestamp and it will only be rebuilt when version changes,
- in 'nut' repo: do the same for builds between releases, while for
tarballs do not store commit infos and add a second prerequisite file
(or maybe we could use the same file) with the timestamp: then if this
timestamp exists, pages will use it, otherwise (i.e. non-tarball
builds) they'll get their own.

> I like the looks of the source-package branch. I don't think I have enough experience with submodules to say what I would prefer, so I'll leave that up to you. Let me know if you'd like help with anything else.

I've created two new repositories for source and package archives,
added them as submodules of 'nut-website', rebased and merged that
branch and updated all submodules.

I was about to push the freshly built files to
'networkupstools.github.io' repo, but came across a file Arno added to
the repo while publishing 2.7.4 (67a4c0e), but that we lack in
'nut-website' repo:
It's not listed in 'ups-protocols.txt', either, but it seems to be the
real match for 'bestpower-mib.c' (see how '.'
is mapped to 'manufacturing date', while
-which appears to be a newer revision of that file- lists that as
'installation date').
What should we do with it?

More information about the Nut-upsdev mailing list