Since FC2 I've noticed a trend towards hardware sensitivity. I have
only one problem with APIC; and that's that it's so close to ACPI that I
sometimes think one and type the other. :)
ACPI, for those that haven't needed to deal with it, appears to be a
radical re-think on APM, the power management daemon. I'm guessing it's
recent swell in development comes not only due to the 2.6 kernel, but
the rising numbers of laptop folks who really need to know how much
battery time they have before they have to find a power socket.
No longer having a 'herd' of various computers to maintain, I only
have a small glimpse into the various outcomes. But those few that I
have, have showed me that determining the 'kind' of acpi on the
motherboard isn't yet perfect (Welcome to WinTel) and sometimes it's
just a better idea for a desktop to shut it off at the kernel
commandline with "noacpi". But I'd be willing to bet that modern
machines do this a lot better, now.
Anyone spend a lot of time in hardware? Is this the overall case, or
just the samples I have to work with? Is there any reason (beyond
telling the monitor to sleep) I'd even want it for desktop use?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian FahrlÃnder Christian, Conservative, and Technomad
Evansville, IN http://www.fahrlander.net
ICQ 5119262
AIM: WheelDweller
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
