Background for debian-devel: On certain (many?) machines, the new X packages will cause the console to completely hang after waking back up from being put to sleep. This can be fixed by having /dev/apm_bios and appropriate kernel support. The powermgmt-base package does this, but on PowerPC, it is not installed by default, leaving PowerPC laptops in a situation where they are easily hung by default.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:32:09PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > Perhaps the bug is not with X, but I submit that it is still a bug. > > Well, why don't you go ask debian-devel what package should handle this > sort of thing? OK. > > If these lockups are occuring becuase there is no /dev/apm_bios, > > couldn't X's postinst at least create it? > > Why shouldn't the makedev package? That would be fine too -- even ideal. Or a dep on powermgmt-base by domething. Powermgmt-base appears to be better because it also handles devfs, though I'm not familiar enough with devfs to know exactly what that means. > > Interestingly, powermgmt-base presents a question about this. On x86 > > machines, apmd depends on this package, but nothing does on powerpc. > > Perhaps xserver-xfree86 should do so, to ensure that proper power management > > interfaces are available to userland? > > And what of people using other X server packages, or with no X server at > all? Shall we just assume those folks don't need power management > support? To date, xserver-xfree86 is the only package I have observed that fails catastrophically without /dev/apm_bios. Most others work with entries in /proc. However I'm certainly fine with having it done on a more global basis. > > powermgmt-base also appears to take care of the situation properly for > > people using devfs. Moreover, its size is 128K installed and depends > > only on makedev, libc6, and debconf. It should not pose any problem > > for the X server. > > Sounds like you have a problem with Debian's PowerPC architecture > support, and not a problem with XFree86 at all. Could be; like I said, knowing the info in this bug's history, I agree that it may not be a bug in X. I just disagree with your decision to close it, and feel that it is still a bug that perhaps needs to be reassigned. -- John