Bug 158487 - Hardware Sensors (lm sensors) broken in 3.5.9
Summary: Hardware Sensors (lm sensors) broken in 3.5.9
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: ksysguard
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: Gentoo Packages Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: KSysGuard Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-02-27 01:49 UTC by Markus Strobl
Modified: 2008-08-10 23:39 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Markus Strobl 2008-02-27 01:49:41 UTC
Version:            (using KDE 3.5.9)
Installed from:    Gentoo Packages
OS:                Linux

After updating KDE to 3.5.9, ksysguard is no longer seeing any hardware monitors provided by lm sensors.

The "Hardware Sensors" entry in the "Sensor Browser" tab is missing.

The "sensors" command works fine and shows all the current readings, so lm sensors is working.

ldd on ksysguardd shows it links to libsensors.so.3 provided by lm sensors as it should.

Downgrading ksysguard to 3.5.8, while leaving the rest of KDE at 3.5.9, restores "Hardware Sensors" and ksysguard can display them without problems.
Comment 1 Frans Pop 2008-03-08 15:40:56 UTC
I'm seeing the same problem on Debian unstable (x86_64):
http://bugs.debian.org/469595 (includes strace)
Comment 2 Frans Pop 2008-03-13 21:13:55 UTC
Doing some grepping during a build, I get the impression that this may be a configure issue.

Comparing kdebase 3.5.8 and 3.5.9 I see for ksysguard/ksysguardd/Linux/lmsensors.c:
-#ifdef HAVE_SENSORS_SENSORS_H
+#ifdef HAVE_LMSENSORS

But when I look for HAVE_LMSENSORS, it is nowhere to be found.

But there is still in config.h.in:
#undef HAVE_SENSORS_SENSORS_H

And during the build I see in obj-x86_64-linux-gnu/config.h:
#define HAVE_SENSORS_SENSORS_H 1

So it looks like maybe HAVE_LMSENSORS is just not getting set?
Comment 3 John Tapsell 2008-03-13 22:59:30 UTC
That sounds very likely :)

On 13 Mar 2008 20:13:56 -0000, Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl> wrote:
[bugs.kde.org quoted mail]
Comment 4 Jo Stringer 2008-04-26 13:19:29 UTC
I just modified that file before compiling in gentoo amd64, and it fixed the issue.
Comment 5 Surgeon 2008-05-25 16:39:26 UTC
Could you please post a patch for the file?
Comment 6 Frans Pop 2008-05-25 16:44:43 UTC
On Sunday 25 May 2008, Surgeon wrote:
> Could you please post a patch for the file?


No, sorry, I can not.

Reason is that although I did have a change that as far as I could tell 
should have worked, the compilation of the Debian package failed at some 
point, so I never got a working build.
I'm afraid it is too long ago to remember the exact details.
Comment 7 Frans Pop 2008-06-10 16:06:57 UTC
Working patch is now available in Debian BTS:
http://bugs.debian.org/469595

Note that message #22 has the bare patch to solve the regression, while message #27 has a slightly extended patch needed for the Debian package.
Comment 8 John Tapsell 2008-06-10 17:16:33 UTC
Someone want to apply? :)  I have no internet connection at the moment.

2008/6/10 Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>:
[bugs.kde.org quoted mail]
Comment 9 Dennis Gallion 2008-08-01 22:16:26 UTC
Confirmed again in openSUSE 11.0 w/KDE 3.5.9 and KDE 4.1
Comment 10 Travis Evans 2008-08-07 02:03:39 UTC
Confirmed on Ubuntu 8.04.1 (KDE 3.5.9).  Regarding Comment 2, changing the "#ifdef HAVE_LMSENSORS" line back to "#ifdef HAVE_SENSORS_SENSORS_H" in ksysguard/ksysguardd/Linux/lmsensors.c and rebuilding fixed the issue for me.
Comment 11 Greg Martyn 2008-08-09 18:17:02 UTC
The patch to fix this was applied back in February.

http://websvn.kde.org/branches/KDE/3.5/kdebase/ksysguard/ksysguardd/Linux/lmsensors.c?r1=771783&r2=779546

Please leave a message if I'm wrong..
Comment 12 Dennis Gallion 2008-08-10 23:39:10 UTC
Sorry, but not so in openSUSE 11.0.  Using KDE 4.1.1 release 26.2 20080722.  Ksysguard is in the kdebase4-workspace package.  Also the case in KDE 3.5.9-65.2, in package kdebase3.  I don't have visibility of the revision numbers on the patch page you link, but since that was Feb, I don't see how that would not have been included in openSUSE.