>> [*] Does someone have an alternative for
>> /proc/acpi/battery/BAT1/{state,info}?
I'm working on it. Should have proto by the end of week.
Regards,
Alex
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
Hi.
On Thursday 12 July 2007 02:04:33 David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Yeah, the bit I consider to be ugly is opening the files from within the
> > kernel, but it seemed to be necessary in order to provide the
functionality
> > without having to rely
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 01:16:07PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 12:53, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > This series of patches implements changes that are
> > > possible/necessary/desirable
> > > (IMO) after the introduction of the .set_target() method in 'struct
> > > pm
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Jul 9 2007 17:45, Alan Cox wrote:
This patch contains the scheduled removal of the ACPI procfs interface.
What part of "we do not gratuitously break user space interfaces" is so
hard for people to understand.
Generally I am with you on that, but if everyone keeps on u
Hi
I don't think this is a problem that can or should be fixed by the acpi
team, but I was hoping for some advice and maybe someone knows a solution.
I have a Zepto Znote 6024W with an intel core 2 duo T7100 and intel
965gm chipset. The problem is that it only reports down to C2 state, ie
i get t
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Yeah, the bit I consider to be ugly is opening the files from within the
> kernel, but it seemed to be necessary in order to provide the functionality
> without having to rely on userspace or do some sort of messy work to figure
> out how to acc
I've reported the bug to bugzilla.kernel.org.
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8734
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi,
On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 12:53, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> > This series of patches implements changes that are
> > possible/necessary/desirable
> > (IMO) after the introduction of the .set_target() method in 'struct pm_ops'
> > (the patch that introduces it is in -mm,
> > http://mar
Hi!
> This series of patches implements changes that are
> possible/necessary/desirable
> (IMO) after the introduction of the .set_target() method in 'struct pm_ops'
> (the patch that introduces it is in -mm,
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm-commits&m=118306698814722&w=2).
(I think this series is
On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 12:14, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wednesday 11 July 2007 20:09:04 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 05:14, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 11 July 2007 11:59:48 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:39:37AM +
Hi.
On Wednesday 11 July 2007 20:09:04 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 05:14, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > On Wednesday 11 July 2007 11:59:48 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:39:37AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yeah, that is a bit confu
Hi,
On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 05:14, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wednesday 11 July 2007 11:59:48 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:39:37AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, that is a bit confusing. At the moment, I'm doing the suspend to
> > > ram
> >
12 matches
Mail list logo
