On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:08:02PM -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
On 02/16/2008 06:53 AM, drago01 wrote:
> Hi,
> I tested the kernel-2.6.24.2-3.fc8 (downloaded the x86_64 build
> directly) on my laptop.
> Hal detects two batteries because it looks in sysfs and in procfs for
> the battery info. I tryed to apply the patch from the hal-list which
> causes hal to not look in procfs but in sysfs only when the sysfs info
> is available. The problem with this is that the info in sysfs is broken
> (capcity 3.0 Wh etc while the procfs info is correct 45Wh).
> I would suggest to set CONFIG_ACPI_SYSFS_POWER to n because the procfs
> info already provides this data for userspace and does not report broken
> values.
>
We should be enabling either one or the other, not both.
my logic was people could be running rawhide kernels on old userspace
(i do this, for instance.)
For Fedora 9 maybe it should be the sysfs interface if it works.
i don't really see a harm in having both.
For 8 it should be only procfs to be backwards compatible. I'll
do that.
agreed, don't want to tempt fate on f8...
cheers, kyle
_______________________________________________
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list