Hi!
> > > Baseline is: i won't implement PCI id matching. pm-utils already use
> >
> > That's okay, but don't stop others from doing that.
>
> I never tried that. I just want to point out that it would be a huge
> wast of resources (and a source of confusion) to further promote two
> different whitelists in the future.
I'm not saying HAL people should keep their whitelist. We should do it
exactly once, do it in s2ram, and do it right.
That means:
a) no dependencies of 1001 gui libraries
b) no dependencies on dbus
c) match on parameters that make sense. "Oh and we can match on
version of libc, too" is a broken design, not an advantage.
That whitelist should have been in kernel; we can't do that, but it
still makes sense to keep it at low level.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Suspend-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/suspend-devel
