On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> >More like it is a "make sure we can actually eject, as we have been told
> >to". We might return an error instead, but if we do, we need a way to
> >force-eject (e.g. echo 2 >eject).
>
> Which stage are you referring to?
Stage 2, of course. It is
On 3/19/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> Userspace wants to (non-force-)-unmount by itself after (1), so it can
> stop the eject process if the filesystems cannot be cleanly
> unmounted. So the force-unmount at (3) ends up
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> Userspace wants to (non-force-)-unmount by itself after (1), so it can
> stop the eject process if the filesystems cannot be cleanly
> unmounted. So the force-unmount at (3) ends up being a redundant
> safety measure at best.
More like it is a "make
On 3/19/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
True. The best available procedure to do this for ACPI bay/dock currently
is, AFAIK:
1. Send event when bay/dock "please release" button/lever is pressed. Do
*nothing* else. I know bay does this right, maybe dock doesn't.
2. W
