>On Tuesday 24 January 2006 20:17, Brown, Len wrote: >> What's the problem with opening a socket to the user-space acpid -- >> the way multiple readers work today? >> > >- one does not want to use current implementation of acpid?
What is better? >- one does not want to depend on having acpid running before > starting snooping acpi events? For example? >- because allowing multiple readers is a "right thing to do"? This is not self-evident, can you give some examples? The argument against, I suppose, is simply why to add code to the kernel when the same feature is already working in user-space? The other argument against is why enhance an interface when perhaps we should instead consider replacing it altogether... >> Dmitry, I don't know how to apply the signed-off thing correctly here, If Dmitry is the original author, then the proper format is to put From: Dmitry Torokhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at start of the body of the message where it can over-ride the e-mail author. This is documented in Documentation/SubmittingPatches. thanks, -Len ps. I'm not trying to be difficult about this, but would like to give this (recurring) proposal the attention it deserves and either accept it or reject it once and for all. - 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
