On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 08:00:14PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote: > > > > if some developer wants to agree that jan is correct we can look at a > > fix. jan, i think your diff is incorrect - isn;t it just repeating what > > we've already said? if what you say is true, isn;t the best fix just to > > remove the text "A single program...powerdown."? > > No, it's not repeating what was already said. But I agree > that it is better to simply remove the text. (People editing > /etc/apm/* can be assumed to know about ln(1), right?) >
oh, it was the ln thing after all. that hurt my head ;( so i think your fix was better than mine, and that's what i've committed. thanks, jmc > BTW, this is what 4.5 had to say about the scripts > (my point being the difference between examining argv[0] and > examining the nonexistent "argument list"): > > These files contain the host's customized actions. Each > file must be an executable binary or shell script suitable > for execution by the execve(2) function. If you wish to > have the same program or script control all transitions, > it may determine which transition is in progress by examining > its argv[0], which is set to one of suspend, standby, > resume, powerup, or powerdown. > > > Jan
