[Nut-upsuser] Status of tripplite_usb driver?

[Peter Selinger]

That is strange. I was under the impression that the port value is
ignored (when using newhidups), and that specifying it should not
break anything. Can specifying a wrong device actually break the
socket naming scheme? Or was the problem here that the user changed
the configuration file without restarting the driver, effectively
causing a driver mismatch? Perhaps it should be documented. -- Peter

Gregory Gulik wrote:
> 
> In my case the problem was that I was specifying a device of 
> /dev/hiddev0 which I was later informed isn't needed.  That was causing 
> upsd to add hiddev0 to the filename of the socket it was looking for.
> 
> 
> Arnaud Quette wrote:
> 
> >there might be 2 things:
> >- the Changes to 'upsdrvctl' Arjen has made not long ago,
> >- the volatile /var directory I've seen on Debian (don't know for other).
> >For this one, check my last post about "Problems starting upsd with newhidups".
> >
> >While the former still has to be backported (for 2.0.4, @Charles: can
> >you take care of it?), the latter has to be addressed on a per system
> >basis.
> >
> >Arnaud
> >--
> >Linux / Unix Expert - MGE UPS SYSTEMS - R&D Dpt
> >Network UPS Tools (NUT) Project Leader - http://www.networkupstools.org/
> >Debian Developer - http://people.debian.org/~aquette/
> >OpenSource Developer - http://arnaud.quette.free.fr/
> >  
> >
> 
> -- 
> Greg Gulik                                 http://www.gulik.org/greg/
> greg @ gulik.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nut-upsuser mailing list
> Nut-upsuser at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
>