On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:45:15PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:31:41 +0200, Alon Levy <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK. I'm not sure what would be better for gnome / your-favorite desktop > > manager. One option is to write an xorg.conf file with this patch. > > Another is a property for the backlight interface. Even though it's > > abuse of the property interface for a one time thing (not like it would > > change during the lifetime of X). Right now it's a stopgap thing, but > > not very user friendly. This patch came from my brother complaining that > > with his mac he can lower the backlight all the way to 0, but not with > > his linux laptop. I don't want to have to maintain an xorg.conf file. > > > > Sorry for the blurb - bottom line, I'm not sure if an xorg.conf file > > would be something management, i.e. libgnome-desktop / kde etc. would > > want to deal with, setting a property is perhaps easier, or another > > solution. > > I would argue that the manufacturer expected the OS to use DPMS to turn > the backlight completely off and save further power when opting to have > it minimal backlight setting at non-zero. >
That sounds right, thanks! Now it just becomes something that the application (in my case libgnomedesktop) has to deal with, i.e. if laptop brand X use DPMS for 0 brightness, else not. Or maybe always using it would also work. I guess this patch is not required in this case, better drop it unless you know, you like it :) > Maybe that is the better answer, have gnome-power-manager turn off the > display when setting the backlight to 0. Given that we have separate > X properties for backlight and DPMS, I would prefer to leave that > decision up to the application / user. > -Chris > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
