On Mon 13. Nov - 13:39:32, David Zeuthen wrote:
> Holger Macht wrote:
> >I think pm-utils should be the only one writing a logfile about a thing it
> >knows about and actually executes.
>
> Disagree; the logfile is to be owned by HAL since HAL provides the ABI/API to
> access / delete it. It's really just
> delayed error handling using a well-define mechanism. Plus, HAL now runs on
> FreeBSD / Solaris, I want it to work
> for them too without having them to use pm-utils [1].
I thought we agreed on pm-utils preferably becoming the common
infrastructure for suspend/hiberante/... across distributions. So why not
just tell them the same?
HAL can just copy it over to its own namespace, then it's owned by HAL.
>
> Hmm, I guess we're arguing details right now.... which means we basically
> agree :-)
Yes, I think so. I'm not arguing about the general idea about the error
handling. I just would like to see pm-utils quite separate from HAL. It's
easier to maintain and less complex this way IMO.
Regards,
Holger
_______________________________________________
Pm-utils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
