Richard Hughes wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 14:09 +0200, Holger Macht wrote:
[snip]
How is this ment to be? Does it just a mirror the corresponding HAL
methods power_management.can_hibernate/suspend? If so, I think we don't
need it. Desktops will have a close connection to Hal anyway to query Hal
itself for this information IMHO.
No. in g-p-m you can set a gconf key so that you can remove the shutdown
(and other) options using sabayon or a manual lockdown by changing these
keys. The session "CanSuspend" means is the user able to suspend (i.e.
HAL is capable) and is the user *allowed* to suspend.
If the Can{Suspend,Hibernate} methods are not meant to state this, what I
think we need is something like...
AllowedSuspend and
AllowedHibernate
which is in plain policy context, which means that you are able to
disable/forbid suspend/hibernate from a system administrator point of
view.
Yes, these are probably better names.
Maybe we should have used MaySuspend and MayHibernate ? I'm not sure
what the best English term for the concept (can && may) is. Perhaps,
able to?
We should probably return different errors for ProhibitedByMechanism and
ProhibitedByPolicy or something.
Jon
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
