Hi All, I am a newcomer to Nut, so firstly hello :-) I am keen to implement Nut and have been digging around most of the day to see how to get my two Unitek 1250xD UPS devices working. I have now managed to get nut installed (from source 2.2.0) and have (I think) success. I found a post here: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsuser/2007-December/003573.html which was discussing the issue with the megatec_usb driver detecting the ups.status as OFF instead of OL or OB. With the patch now applied I get the following: battery.charge: 67.2 battery.voltage: 25.20 battery.voltage.nominal: 23.5 driver.flag.ignoreoff: enabled driver.name: megatec_usb driver.parameter.bus: 003 driver.parameter.pollinterval: 2 driver.parameter.port: auto driver.parameter.productid: 0000 driver.parameter.vendorid: 0001 driver.version: 2.2.1- driver.version.internal: 1.5.9 input.frequency: 50.0 input.voltage: 229.0 input.voltage.fault: 165.0 input.voltage.maximum: 234.0 input.voltage.minimum: 226.0 output.voltage: 229.0 output.voltage.nominal: 230.0 ups.beeper.status: disabled ups.delay.shutdown: 0 ups.delay.start: 2 ups.load: 0.0 ups.mfr: UNITEK ups.model: ALPHA1250 VER2.0C ups.serial: unknown ups.status: OL ups.temperature: 0.0 Which is great, I am assuming this is the desired output. My question is, will this patch become a main part of nut ? what does the ignoreoff option do to the driver in terms of usage ? i.e will nut still work as anticipated ? (Posted to both users and dev as it fits in both camps) Kind Regards Matt Brown
Alexander I. Gordeev
2008-Feb-16 18:49 UTC
[Nut-upsdev] [Nut-upsuser] Unitek UPS 1250xD - megatec_usb driver
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 20:50:13 +0300, Matt Brown <matt at mbrown.co.uk> wrote:> Hi All, > > I am a newcomer to Nut, so firstly hello :-) >Hello :)> I am keen to implement Nut and have been digging around most of the > day to see how to get my two Unitek 1250xD UPS devices working. > > I have now managed to get nut installed (from source 2.2.0) and have > (I think) success. I found a post here: > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsuser/2007-December/003573.html > > which was discussing the issue with the megatec_usb driver detecting > the ups.status as OFF instead of OL or OB. > > With the patch now applied I get the following: > > battery.charge: 67.2 > battery.voltage: 25.20 > battery.voltage.nominal: 23.5 > driver.flag.ignoreoff: enabled > driver.name: megatec_usb > driver.parameter.bus: 003 > driver.parameter.pollinterval: 2 > driver.parameter.port: auto > driver.parameter.productid: 0000 > driver.parameter.vendorid: 0001 > driver.version: 2.2.1- > driver.version.internal: 1.5.9 > input.frequency: 50.0 > input.voltage: 229.0 > input.voltage.fault: 165.0 > input.voltage.maximum: 234.0 > input.voltage.minimum: 226.0 > output.voltage: 229.0 > output.voltage.nominal: 230.0 > ups.beeper.status: disabled > ups.delay.shutdown: 0 > ups.delay.start: 2 > ups.load: 0.0 > ups.mfr: UNITEK > ups.model: ALPHA1250 VER2.0C > ups.serial: unknown > ups.status: OL > ups.temperature: 0.0 > > Which is great, I am assuming this is the desired output. >Everything seems ok to me...> My question is, will this patch become a main part of nut ? what does > the ignoreoff option do to the driver in terms of usage ? i.e will nut > still work as anticipated ? >This patch is already in the trunk and testing branch. So it will most likely get into stable release soon. This option informs the driver to ignore one bit from the UPS status info, which is reported incorrectly by several models. I have one. It reports OL and OB ok with ignoreoff.> (Posted to both users and dev as it fits in both camps) > > Kind Regards > > Matt Brown-- Alexander
>> > Everything seems ok to me... > >> My question is, will this patch become a main part of nut ? what does >> the ignoreoff option do to the driver in terms of usage ? i.e will >> nut >> still work as anticipated ? >> > > This patch is already in the trunk and testing branch. So it will most > likely get into stable release soon. > This option informs the driver to ignore one bit from the UPS status > info, > which is reported incorrectly by several models. I have one. It > reports > OL and OB ok with ignoreoff. >Hi Alexander, Thanks for that, I am seeing one issue tho which is: Feb 16 20:09:37 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Communications with UPS Unitek at localhost established Feb 16 20:10:58 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:11:00 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Feb 16 20:11:05 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:11:07 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Poll UPS [Unitek at localhost] failed - Data stale Feb 16 20:11:07 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Communications with UPS Unitek at localhost lost Feb 16 20:11:08 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Feb 16 20:11:17 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Communications with UPS Unitek at localhost established Feb 16 20:13:02 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:13:05 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Feb 16 20:13:10 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:13:12 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Feb 16 20:14:52 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:14:53 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Feb 16 20:15:21 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:15:24 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Feb 16 20:15:53 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - check driver Feb 16 20:15:53 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer stale Do I need to tweak something somewhere ? Regards Matt
Alexander I. Gordeev
2008-Feb-17 13:20 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] Unitek UPS 1250xD - megatec_usb driver
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:23:39 +0300, Matt Brown <matt at mbrown.co.uk> wrote:> Hi Alexander, > > Thanks for that, I am seeing one issue tho which is: > > Feb 16 20:09:37 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Communications with UPS > Unitek at localhost established > Feb 16 20:10:58 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:11:00 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > Feb 16 20:11:05 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:11:07 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Poll UPS [Unitek at localhost] > failed - Data stale > Feb 16 20:11:07 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Communications with UPS > Unitek at localhost lost > Feb 16 20:11:08 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > Feb 16 20:11:17 pegasus upsmon[32005]: Communications with UPS > Unitek at localhost established > Feb 16 20:13:02 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:13:05 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > Feb 16 20:13:10 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:13:12 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > Feb 16 20:14:52 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:14:53 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > Feb 16 20:15:21 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:15:24 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > Feb 16 20:15:53 pegasus upsd[28437]: Data for UPS [Unitek] is stale - > check driver > Feb 16 20:15:53 pegasus upsd[28437]: UPS [Unitek] data is no longer > stale > > Do I need to tweak something somewhere ? > > Regards > > MattThis is not good... Please, post the output of the actual driver with -DDDDD. That is: megatec_usb -a Unitek -DDDDD -- Alexander