On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 16:27 -0500, Victor Lowther wrote: > On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 18:31 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > > Hm, seems I missed to review your vlowther-dynamic-hook-disable changes. > > Honestly, I'm a bit sceptical about adding this new /etc/pm/parameters > > and /etc/pm/blacklists interface. > > > > We already have a (documented) mechanism for users to disable a hook > > (which is, to create a non-executable file in /etc/pm/sleep.d/. Why do > > we need another mechanism? > > The hook-disabling mechanism is not primarily for users -- it is for > modules and other hooks. I added the blacklist-parsing code because it > is a bit more intuitive than masking out a system hook by creating a > nonexecutable file. > > > Second, do we really need to pass parameters to hooks? I haven't > > needed it so far. Imho we should only add functionality which is > > actually used. > > I use it. If I don't pass --quirk-none (or mask 99video out using a > blacklist entry or a nonexecutable hook), then the paramaters hal passes > to pm-suspend will hardlock my system on reboot everytime when it tries > to POST the card. HAL currently does not take the video card and video > driver into account when deciding which quirks to pass to pm-suspend, > and until it does I will need this sort of functionality. > > > Besides, those two new interfaces are completely undocumented. > > Mea culpa. I will document them.
Basic documentation added for /etc/pm/blacklist and /etc/pm/parameters as they are currently implemented. The documentation and the interfaces can be updated once we get more feedback from the other regulars on the list. > > Cheers, > > Michael > > > > -- Victor Lowther Ubuntu Certified Professional _______________________________________________ Pm-utils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
