From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: acpi_sbs with kernel 2.6.11 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:24:03 +0000 Message-ID: <1110500644.8136.1.camel@tyrosine> References: <75eeb70e0503092013562a05d@mail.gmail.com> <75eeb70e05030921185b337dd2@mail.gmail.com> <4230A2BD.6090609@bartol.udel.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <4230A2BD.6090609-OBnUx95tOyn10jlvfTC4gA@public.gmane.org> Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 14:40 -0500, Rich Townsend wrote: > Not at the moment. I'm still trying to work out a coherent approach to > bringing together Control Method and Smart batteries under the same code > framework. hal has recently gained the ability to parse control method battery status. Adding support for smart batteries is trivial. There's no need to unite battery status at the kernel level, especially since we'll need to support apm and pmu batteries as well. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click