Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 18:26:22 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: phk@dk.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp) Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, phk@dk.tfs.com, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DMI anyone ? Message-ID: <199708030856.SAA13491@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <8047.870593378@critter.dk.tfs.com> from Poul-Henning Kamp at "Aug 3, 97 09:29:38 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp stands accused of saying: > > > >See the earlier thread on SMBIOS/DMI, and Phoenix's tech stuff page > >for the SMBIOS spec. > > > >Bottom line : we need a means for making 16-bit BIOS calls (16-bit > >protected mode interface is part of the spec)... > > I was in that thread. This was more a question along the line of > > "would DMI/SMBIOS support (whatever it means) buy us anything ?" Oops, so you were. Apologies. IMHO, yes. If nothing else, it'd be a checkmark feature, but I think that there are a number of useful things that DMI could offer. On systems that support it, the extra information at the hardware level might be handy, but IMHO it's the higher-level management functions that would make it a winner; to be able to drop a BSD box into someone`s DMI schema and have it behave would be useful. Having said that, it's worth studying the recent history of DMI; a lot of people seem very lukewarm on it. > Poul-Henning Kamp | phk@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD Core-team. -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708030856.SAA13491>