-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 365
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix nut-scanner
device naming in sanity-check reports
#2317
Conversation
…v_num Signed-off-by: Jim Klimov <[email protected]>
Had a CI agent reboot... Restarted build. |
… NOT always a "nut-serialX"!) Signed-off-by: Jim Klimov <[email protected]>
…erating WHOLE lists, not just parsing one "device" Signed-off-by: Jim Klimov <[email protected]>
…ev_num to size_t Signed-off-by: Jim Klimov <[email protected]>
ede869c
to
31ebf5e
Compare
✅ Build nut 2.8.1.1443-master completed (commit 5e9764232e by @jimklimov) |
…can_display_sanity_check_serial() Actually rewind it back to the number which the first entry for this device type had in the "continuous numbering" we track for this scan report. Signed-off-by: Jim Klimov <[email protected]>
31ebf5e
to
3628b0d
Compare
✅ Build nut 2.8.1.1445-master completed (commit 3386175b8b by @jimklimov) |
Looks good - don't have multiple devices to test with right now, but will follow up if a problem should appear. |
Avoid this sort of mismatch:
[nutdev-usb1]
vs....some devices: nutdev-serial1
)It should rather be like this:
Fallout of #2243 / #2247.
Note: some testing with multiple devices would be welcome. I am not convinced if the sanity checker had a bug about starting
nutdev_num
from thelast_nutdev_num
(and moving the number upwards... to where the list has no entries to number?) - it could have reported bogus device numbers in fact. But that's a gut feeling, hopefully fixed by this PR if the bug was there...CC @desertwitch :)