Re: [gpm] Re: Gnome 2.16 Module Proposal: GNOME Power Manager

["Jeroen Zwartepoorte" <jeroen zwartepoorte gmail com>]

I'm curious: what role does the powersave daemon fulfill? I'm running
FC5 and afaik, HAL/g-p-m gets it information directly from the OS
(ACPI)?

Regards,

Jeroen

On 4/10/06, Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 12:25 +0200, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 11:59 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 01:28, Corey Burger wrote:
> > > > On 4/9/06, Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org> wrote:
> > > > > Elijah Newren wrote:
> > > > > > On 4/9/06, Scott J. Harmon <harmon ksu edu> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Am I the only one who mouses over the applet to see how much more time
> > > > > >> until the battery is fully charged?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Definitely not; I rely on this frequently.  I'd be heavily annoyed if
> > > > > > the applet wasn't showing (and no other equally easy way of obtaining
> > > > > > this information was available) when my laptop is plugged in and not
> > > > > > fully charged.  If it's both plugged in and fully charged then I'd be
> > > > > > fine with it not being there, as long as that was the only case.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Hmm. In this configuration, it is.
> > > >
> > > > The problem with hiding in this case is that the user must know that
> > > > when they are plugged in and fully charged, the icon will vanish,
> > > > rather than just looking and seeing that they are fully charged and
> > > > plugged in. Ouch.
> > >
> > > Well, if once the battery reaches 100%, a short-lived notification
> > > bubble says so then the icon can disappear without harm. No need to
> > > pollute the notification area with a "battery is full" icon, OTOH on the
> > > road the fuel gauge is important.
> > >
> > > IMHO the best design is found in PocketPC2003: the battery icon starts
> > > to appear only when it's half-empty.
> > >
> > While this debate about people's battery status preferences is extremely
> > interesting and intellectually challenging I think its on a level of
> > nitpickery that belongs on either some HIG related list or in bugzilla.
> >
> > The actual question at hand is, Is GPM ready to go into GNOME 2.16?
> >
> one of the problems I've found while putting g-p-m for NLD 10 is that
> the power saving daemons (powersave in SuSE case) don't update the HAL
> properties in all cases (can_suspend, can_hibernate, etc). We need to
> make sure that is done (calling hal-set-property it's very easy) so that
> g-p-m can just use HAL reliably.
>
> Apart from that, I'd say g-p-m is ready. Some integration work might be
> needed (like inhibit thing Richard added), but nothing that can't be
> done in the 2.15/2.16 development process.
> --
> Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>