On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 17:21 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote: > (Of course, we haven't defined how locking on org.freedesktop.Hal. > Device.SystemPowerManagement will work just yet.. but I took it into > account with the new HAL locking API that went into HEAD earlier this > week. This is needed not only for this.. but also to make multiple > session-based PM daemons work for both fast-user-switching and > multi-seat.) > > So, InhibitManual() should probably go and we should advise that > "system" apps simply lock the system mechanism. This makes a lot more > sense I think; Richard?
Yes, I think I agree with this. InhibitAuto becomes Inhibit, and InhibitManual gets punted to something system (HAL?) level. Richard. _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
