On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 22:26 +0100, Olaf Hering wrote:
> For some weird reason, sysrq o is hidden behind CONFIG_PM.
> Why? One can power off just fine without that. Can pm_sysrq_init be
> moved to a better place? I think it used to be in sysrq.c in 2.4.
>
> Too bad, with this patch radeonfb fails
On Tue, Mar 15, Olaf Hering wrote:
>
> For some weird reason, sysrq o is hidden behind CONFIG_PM.
> Why? One can power off just fine without that. Can pm_sysrq_init be
> moved to a better place? I think it used to be in sysrq.c in 2.4.
>
> Too bad, with this patch radeonfb fails to compile.
For some weird reason, sysrq o is hidden behind CONFIG_PM.
Why? One can power off just fine without that. Can pm_sysrq_init be
moved to a better place? I think it used to be in sysrq.c in 2.4.
Too bad, with this patch radeonfb fails to compile.
Index: linux-2.6.11-olh/arch/ppc64/Kconfig
For some weird reason, sysrq o is hidden behind CONFIG_PM.
Why? One can power off just fine without that. Can pm_sysrq_init be
moved to a better place? I think it used to be in sysrq.c in 2.4.
Too bad, with this patch radeonfb fails to compile.
Index: linux-2.6.11-olh/arch/ppc64/Kconfig
On Tue, Mar 15, Olaf Hering wrote:
For some weird reason, sysrq o is hidden behind CONFIG_PM.
Why? One can power off just fine without that. Can pm_sysrq_init be
moved to a better place? I think it used to be in sysrq.c in 2.4.
Too bad, with this patch radeonfb fails to compile.
After
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 22:26 +0100, Olaf Hering wrote:
For some weird reason, sysrq o is hidden behind CONFIG_PM.
Why? One can power off just fine without that. Can pm_sysrq_init be
moved to a better place? I think it used to be in sysrq.c in 2.4.
Too bad, with this patch radeonfb fails to
6 matches
Mail list logo