Hi!
> >I am far from qualified to comment on this, but from a
> >users point of view, is it possible to not have laptop
> >specific code in the kernel?
> >I have had two Linux laptops and with both I had ACPI
> >issues.
> >The vendors of both laptops (Toshiba Tecra S1 and now
> >an Asus W3V) don't seem to be following standards. With
> >both I seem to need to patch ACPI to get various
> >functions of the laptop to work.
> >I would love to see laptop specific functionality
> >definitions exist outside the kernel.
> >
> I don't think that forcing laptop users to have their
> own code outside the kernel is really the best approach
> for either the developers or the users. Most users will
No, we don't want that. But we do not want ibm-acpi, toshiba-acpi,
asus-acpi, etc, when they really only differ in string constants used.
We want userland to tell kernel 'mail led is controlled by AML routine
foo', instead of having gazillion *-acpi modules.
--
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
