Possible bug in machine field ?

[uttarayan21]

My laptop broke so the discovery to this :)

[grtcdr]

Ah dang it!

That phrase should not show up... It should be replacing "To be filled by O.E.M." with an empty string whenever it finds it, but for some reason it's printing that instead. Can you check if the files that we're reading from aren't actually the cause so we can pinpoint where the issue is creeping up from?

[uttarayan21]

Here you go ! I have no clue what is supposed to be in there but it seems that .replace probably isn't replacing multiple "To be filled by O.E.M" strings.

[grtcdr]

I have no clue what is supposed to be in there but it seems that .replace probably isn't replacing multiple "To be filled by O.E.M" strings.

Yup, I'll :mag_right: investigate the issue.

[grtcdr]

Uhm, I'm not exactly sure why this is occuring, the part where data provided by the files is processed before being returned looks good as far as I can tell... :confused:

[uttarayan21]

I'll try to debug this later since college is really hectic right now.

[grtcdr]

I'll try to debug this later since college is really hectic right now.

I bet, it was really stressful these couple weeks for me too, good luck with everything :smile:

[grtcdr]

Found the culprit!

Right around the end of linux::machine() we have:

if family == name && family == version {
            return Ok(family);
        } else if version.is_empty() || version.len() <= 15 {
            return Ok(new_product.into_iter().join(" "));
        }

        Ok(version)

First condition & second condition are not satisfied, so it ends up returning version, which in your case is "To be filled..."

[grtcdr]

I hate the diversity of the information that manufacturers provide or don't provide in this case. We'll have to add a new set of conditions or somehow simplify it and make it a lot more maintainable for the future.