On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, James Carlson wrote:
>
> What about /etc/default/sys-suspend and the "Syssuspend*" family of X
> resources?
>
/etc/default/sys-suspend is part of the CDE consolidation.
gnome-sys-suspend was a GNOME equivilent of the Motif sys-suspend
tool, so to make them somewhat compatible, gnome-sys-suspend consumed
the defaults file. I don't suspect this case intends to do anything
with /etc/default/sys-suspend, and leave it to CDE for disposition.
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Gary Winiger wrote:
> Brian,
>
> I've not followed along for a while, so excuse my ignorance.
> How will this relate to/affect things like the recent work in
> uadmin(1M) to bring the system down properly with relationship
> to the audit subsystem? I've left this intact and Cc-ed Randy
> because recently he said that he was doing stuff in this area
> relative to lid closure events. I believe there's also some
> work going on to EOF sys-suspend(1M) (/usr/openwin/bin/sys-syspend).
> Is there any relationship with that project?
>
gnome-sys-suspend doesn't do the expected auditing. However, it has
very limited usability on x86 platforms (meaning: it is broken), and
should either be fixed or removed. The team choose to remove it
(which is OK by me).
There is some intention to EOF /usr/openwin/bin/sys-syspend as a
continuation of the CDE EOF. I don't expect this case to care much
about that one, though not the other way around.
However, the PM teams are working on a proposal for a library and
cli's which would provide the committed API's to be used for power
management control (and for things like GPM and/or HAL to consume)
which would make /usr/openwin/bin/sys-syspend obsolete. That is not
part of this case, but is made for reference.
---- Randy
