Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:04:05 +0100 From: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: ports@freebsd.org, sumikawa@freebsd.org, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>, Rong-En Fan <rafan@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sysutils/xbattbar for !i386 Message-ID: <200612121504.13271.max@love2party.net> In-Reply-To: <20061212121035.GB33414@svm.csie.ntu.edu.tw> References: <20061212064859.GA33414@svm.csie.ntu.edu.tw> <790a9fff0612120057j7ab3c6fdxb3761c7e6ef4cae6@mail.gmail.com> <20061212121035.GB33414@svm.csie.ntu.edu.tw>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1780238.h1fvRTaAQN Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 12 December 2006 13:10, Rong-En Fan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 02:57:12AM -0600, Scot Hetzel wrote: > > On 12/12/06, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> wrote: > > >On 12/12/06, Rong-En Fan <rafan@freebsd.org> wrote: > > >> Recently, I installed a FreeBSD/amd64 laptop. I found this port > > >> uses apm (i386 only) interface to get battery information. The > > >> patch below changes it to use sysctl(3). Thus, it is usable on > > >> amd64. > > >> > > >> http://people.freebsd.org/~rafan/xbattbar.diff > > >> > > >> It works on my ThinkPad X60 (-CURRENT). If you are running this > > >> port, please have a test. > > > > > >Works on my HP dv8135nr (-CURRENT) system. > > > > I have updated the patch so that it can be compiled for systems that > > have either an APM or ACPI interface for battery status. > > > > The Makefile has been changed to always use the ACPI interface when > > not being built on the i386 arch (i.e. amd64, ...). On the i386 arch > > it defaults to ACPI, but can be changed via the options menu to use > > APM. > > The way you handle OPTIONS is incorrect. See Porter's Handbook and/or > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/2006-May/093088.html > for details. > > As for APM/ACPI knob, I think APM is necessary on 4.x. Not sure > about 5.x status. If acpi on 5.x is usable, I suggest we just > use acpi and use apm on 4.x i386 only? Can't you make this a runtime option on i386. If the ACPI sysctl is there= =20 use it, if not fall back to APM. Also it seems to make sense to report=20 this upstream instead of sticking it in patches. > Regards, > Rong-En Fan > > > Scot > > > > -- > > DISCLAIMER: > > No electrons were mamed while sending this message. Only slightly > > bruised. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" =2D-=20 /"\ Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News --nextPart1780238.h1fvRTaAQN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBFfrbdXyyEoT62BG0RArHkAJ9I73wj/kImkSxJbxEbFSrzr3bn3wCfckCP zI04ge6SJ/AVdQZw9PWYo/w= =ZjuD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1780238.h1fvRTaAQN--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200612121504.13271.max>