On 19/07/2024 10:21, Adolf Belka wrote:
Hi Michael & all,
nut has a command nut-scanner which scans for nut systems.
An IPFire user has used that command and it came back saying that
it couldn't find the USB library libusb-1.0.so which is commented
out in the rootfile.
It looks like nut when it is checking what libraries are available
for the nut-scanner is looking for the .so files only and not the
.so.0 or .so.0.3.0 files.
The same thing is occurring with avahi and netsnmp where nut is
again only looking for the .so files, so in all three cases nut
concludes that the usb, avahi and netsnmp libraries are not
present even when they are.
It looks like no one has ever used the nut-scanner command and
flagged up the issue as it will have had this problem for ever, as
the libusb-1.0.so file has always been commented out (standard
IPFire practice for rootfiles)
What should we do in this case when nut is only looking for the
.so files. Should we uncomment the required .so libs?
The only alternative that I can see would be to comment out the
command nut-scanner.
If we do uncomment the .so lib files mentioned above, how do we
ensure that they stay uncommented and someone in the future does
not see them and comment them out in the rootfiles.
I did that with nut about two years ago. I don't know now if that
means that some of nut will not be properly working or not.
Should I now go an uncomment all the nut .so file entries in the
nut rootfile?
Feedback and suggestions of the best approach for this gladly
accepted.
Regards,
Adolf.
Looking at the sources, https://github.com/networkupstools/nut.git,
(which I can't really read), it looks like there is a config option,
SOFILE_LIBUSB1 in
https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/master/tools/nut-scanner
around lines 220 and onwards. Could nut be recompiled to use the so
file? It would side-step the rootfile issue.
Regards,
Nick