Mattia Dongili wrote:
On Wed, January 25, 2006 6:23 am, Dmitry Torokhov said:
On Wednesday 25 January 2006 00:09, Brown, Len wrote:
[...]
> I have no problem changing the implementation to avoid useless stuff if
the patch is going to be considered for acceptance.
The other argument against is why enhance an interface when
perhaps we should instead consider replacing it altogether...
The same thing has been said at Dmitry's submission (08/2004) and
/proc/acpi/event is still there. :)
Also, removing /proc/acpi/event will take a very long time.
Anyway what would you suggest (if you have already some plan)? I'd like to
try implementing it.
What about the dbus-kernel interface?
Acpi events are probably one of the things that should
make use of this one sooner or later?
However I have no idea in which state dbus is on kernel side.
Thomas
-
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
