On 3/2/07, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Baseline is: i won't implement PCI id matching. pm-utils already use > > > > > > That's okay, but don't stop others from doing that. > > > > I never tried that. I just want to point out that it would be a huge > > wast of resources (and a source of confusion) to further promote two > > different whitelists in the future. > > I'm not saying HAL people should keep their whitelist. We should do it > exactly once, do it in s2ram, and do it right.
Well, I don't like HAL either but the point is that HAL can do sophisticated matching and choice s2ram options based on a number of factors. And it's _already_ there. > That means: > > a) no dependencies of 1001 gui libraries > > b) no dependencies on dbus Average user is probably running Gnome/KDE that was installed by default by the distro. > That whitelist should have been in kernel; we can't do that, but it > still makes sense to keep it at low level. Even if it means duplicating a part of HAL? s2ram provides the mechanism, the upper layer (which can range from bash scripts to HAL) dictates the policy. Makes sense to me... Luca ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Suspend-devel mailing list Suspend-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/suspend-devel
