James R. Van Zandt wrote: > However, my mental model for sleepd is "suspend if nothing has > happened for the last N minutes", and it seems that gaining or losing > AC power should count as "something has happened". Here's a patch for > one possible implementation.
I think that's probably a good idea, but why does the patch need to be complicated by the fraction and such? If we're counting any power gain/loss as activity, seems to me it could just use them to unset its idle counter. If you have a reason for the fractions, I'm open to it but in the meantime I will fix the bug the other way. -- see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
