[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LM99 support

To: sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: LM99 support
From: p5yke <p5yke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 05:44:05 +1000
In-reply-to: <20040423202400.347c93b8.khali@linux-fr.org>
Message-id: <1082749445.2933.5.camel@c211-30-214-50.rivrw3.nsw.optusnet.com.au>
References: <1082724851.408911f30c994@imp.gcu.info> <1082726817.22637.21.camel@c211-30-214-50.rivrw3.nsw.optusnet.com.au> <1082727615.40891cbf44f70@imp.gcu.info> <20040423202400.347c93b8.khali@linux-fr.org>

I have started 12 hour shifts this morning so it might be 4 days before
I have time to apply with this. I tried briefy. 

I dont know C and I have never patched before. Unfortunately I think I
know just enough to be dangerous! LOL

Is the command 'patch <linux-2.6.3-i2c-lm99.diff' in the chips
directory?? Do the Failed messages matter?

Scott

On Sat, 2004-04-24 at 04:24, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Psyke,
> 
> Here are the relevant patches to add LM99 support to the lm90 kernel.
> There's one against 2.6.3 and one against 2.6.6-rc2, pick the one you
> prefer. If you prefer a patch against a different kernel, just tell me.
> 
> Let me know how it works for you! I will now be adding support to the
> user-space tools.
> 
> Thanks.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: LM99 support
  - From: Jean Delvare

Prev by Date: Re: sensord: rrd database and timeslots
Next by Date: Re: LM99 support
Previous by thread: Re: sensord: rrd database and timeslots
Next by thread: Re: LM99 support
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread