Brian Cameron wrote: > > Simon: > >>> Run-time check is better than compilation test. You patch will have >>> to be re-worked >>> when suspend to ram come to work on Sparc, but a run-time check >>> means you don't >>> have to recompile and rework the patch. > > >> Agree. The best design is to have 5 buttons "Suspend", "Hibernate", >> "Shutdown", "Reboot" and "Cancel" on dialog. And run-time checking >> decides which one is showed and which one is hidden. I think this >> should be left to a totally new gnome-sys-suspend. >> >> For this short-term patch, early I just didn't want to change GUI, >> and let "suspend on X86" and "hibernate on sparc" share one button. I >> suppose adding a new button might be import some other work, like >> A11Y, L10N. > > Our long term plan is to add the new button anyway. Why not add all > the new buttons now and get it done with? Please remember to ping > Takao after you make the change so that he can update the L10N. > > Is it possible that we can modify the GUI so that the best design of > 5 buttons can be implemented now all at once? That would be ideal > rather than fixing the GUI piece-by-piece, I think. Well. I think this belongs to a long-term solution because backend for these buttons is expected to make a big change in the near future. Personally I guess the good backend design is that gnome-sys-suspend directly depends on the future HAL or GPM D-Bus interfaces. Currently 2008/021 HAL Power Management and LSARC/2007/702 GPM are discussing two sets of interfaces.
- HAL D-Bus interface "org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.SystemPowerManagement", method "suspend", "hibernate", "shutdown", "reboot". And some properties like "can_suspend" for checking hardware ability, libpolkit privilege "hal-power-suspend" for checking user authorization. - Or GPM D-Bus interface "org.freedesktop.PowerManagement", method "suspend", "hibernate", "shutdown", "reboot" and "CanSuspend", "CanShutdown"... If we change a lot now, I'm afraid we have to do duplicate work once the above new interfaces are delivered soon. > >> Anyway, if module owner Brian also prefers to "new button", I would >> like rework this patch. > > I prefer adding the new button now. I see. > > Also, remember that we should not apply patches to gnome-sys-suspend. > Instead, please make the changes to the "sys-suspend" opensolaris.org > SVN module and create a new version of the tarball. Then update our > build tarball location with the new tarball, and bump the version number > in the spec file. Got it. This patch will be for gnome-sys-suspend source rather than spec-files. > > > Brian
