Re: gnome-screensaver, new api calls requested :-)

[Richard Hughes <hughsient gmail com>]

On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 16:39 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 16:20 -0500, William Jon McCann wrote:
> > Hi David,
> > 
> > David Zeuthen wrote:
> > > Sounds good, the only concern I have is that g-p-m requires HAL and HAL
> > > is not available on a lot of exotic platforms (in fact right now only on
> > > Linux 2.6 based systems) so some people may be upset about this.
> > 
> > That is a very good point.  I hadn't really considered that.
> > 
> > Maybe g-p-m could operate in a reduced capacity on systems without HAL? 
> >   For instance, if we move X11 power management stuff into g-p-m that 
> > part wouldn't require HAL.
> 
> Yea, I suspect vendors shipping g-s but not g-p-m can simply write a
> small daemon listing on D-BUS for doing the DPMS stuff. I'm sure using
> python or something equally modern with D-BUS bindings can be done in
> about 20 lines. Perhaps ship this in the g-s tarball as an example. Then
> g-s would be feature complete and still allow to integrate with g-p-m
> where the DPMS stuff ultimately should be.

Yes, thats a good idea.

> How about that?
> 
> Of course, we should encourage such vendors to port HAL to their
> platform and as an example it seems like Sun Microsystem is doing that
> for Solaris.

Yup, and the more things that use HAL, the higher on the priority list
it will go.

Hacking will commence tomorrow.

Richard.