On 29 Jun 1999, Peter Mutsaers wrote:
> A while ago (I think when 3.X was still current) when my (ATX) desktop
> system would go in suspend mode (using zzz, waiting for the timeout or
> by pushing <4s on the power button) the system would become completely
> quiet:
>
> - di
A while ago (I think when 3.X was still current) when my (ATX) desktop
system would go in suspend mode (using zzz, waiting for the timeout or
by pushing <4s on the power button) the system would become completely
quiet:
- disks spin down
- CPU fan of
Nowadays, some fan keeps running. This
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > > : Someone submitted a patch that checked to see if the BIOS returned a
> > > : value > 64M, and if so to 'accept' it's value for the memory, since it's
> > > : more likely to be correct. I'd like to apply it to -current, but I'm
> > > : not sure of
>>[regarding RTC vs. BIOS selection algorithm]
>I don't think this is complete, because I think (don't know) that many
>older BIOS's only reported up to 64M of memory, so if you had more than
>64M in the box it didn't report it.
The RTC extmem cannot "report" >64 MB either. In fact, the RTC extme
> > : Someone submitted a patch that checked to see if the BIOS returned a
> > : value > 64M, and if so to 'accept' it's value for the memory, since it's
> > : more likely to be correct. I'd like to apply it to -current, but I'm
> > : not sure of the political ramifications
> >
> > I think th
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <199904272310.raa06...@mt.sri.com> Nate Williams writes:
> : Someone submitted a patch that checked to see if the BIOS returned a
> : value > 64M, and if so to 'accept' it's value for the memory, since it's
> : more likely to be correct. I'd li
In message <199904272310.raa06...@mt.sri.com> Nate Williams writes:
: Someone submitted a patch that checked to see if the BIOS returned a
: value > 64M, and if so to 'accept' it's value for the memory, since it's
: more likely to be correct. I'd like to apply it to -current, but I'm
: not sure of
> > : I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
> > : I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
> > : management, docking and all that other good stuff should come eventually.
> >
> > One problem that I've had in trying to use the acpi
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message
> Doug Rabson writes:
> : I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
> : I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
> : management, docking and all that other good stuff should come
> Small "nit" with APM type stuff, when i close the laptop pccardd seems
> to deallocate my netcard. Is this really nessesary?
Yes, it is. This is what Win95 does as well, and because of lots of
weird problems (not the least of which being certain cards that don't restore
their settings when res
In message Alfred
Perlstein writes:
: Small "nit" with APM type stuff, when i close the laptop pccardd seems
: to deallocate my netcard. Is this really nessesary? It comes back
: sometimes when i open it again, but not always...
Hmmm. In theory if the lid closing is shutting down the laptop i
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message
> Doug Rabson writes:
> : I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
> : I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
> : management, docking and all that other good stuff should come
In message <199904271356.waa15...@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp> Takanori
Watanabe writes:
: options "VM86"
: vm86.c:initial_bioscalls() imprements ACPI Spec section 15.
Yea!!!
The acpi info program that was posted here (or at least talked about
here) recently now works! Yippie!
Warner
In message <199904271352.haa17...@harmony.village.org>, Warner Losh
さんいわく:
>In message Do
>ug Rabson writes:
>: I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
>: I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
>: management, docking a
In message Alex
Zepeda writes:
: and zzz (and apm -z) don't do much. If we had ACPI support, I'd try
: hitting the power button
I've been suspending my machine fairly well with this patch.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the
In message
Doug Rabson writes:
: I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
: I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
: management, docking and all that other good stuff should come eventually.
One problem that I've had in trying to
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Takanori Watanabe wrote:
> In message ,
> Do
> ug Rabson wrote:
> >I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
> >I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
> >management, docking and all that other good stuff should
In message , Do
ug Rabson wrote:
>I have the ACPI spec and I'm starting to get to grips with it. Initially,
>I will be trying to use the static device configuration tables but power
>management, docking and all that other good stuff should come eventually.
Don't you try my code?
I put it at
http:/
On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > In message <87so9r3x44@muon.xs4all.nl> Peter Mutsaers writes:
> > : Is this a bug that I should report through send-pr, is it already
> > : known as a bug or is this an intentional change in behaviour?
> >
On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <87so9r3x44@muon.xs4all.nl> Peter Mutsaers writes:
> : Is this a bug that I should report through send-pr, is it already
> : known as a bug or is this an intentional change in behaviour?
>
> This is a known bug. I thought I kludged around
>> "WL" == Warner Losh writes:
WL> In message <87so9r3x44@muon.xs4all.nl> Peter Mutsaers writes:
WL> : Is this a bug that I should report through send-pr, is it already
WL> : known as a bug or is this an intentional change in behaviour?
WL> This is a known bug. I thought I k
In message <87so9r3x44@muon.xs4all.nl> Peter Mutsaers writes:
: Is this a bug that I should report through send-pr, is it already
: known as a bug or is this an intentional change in behaviour?
This is a known bug. I thought I kludged around it in apm.c in the
timeframe that you mentioned. D
t time for suspend mode passes
Now it won't suspend in any way anymore (which is irritating since my
computer is in the living room; it must be quiet but I don't want it
to reboot all the time).
Is this a bug that I should report through send-pr, is it already
known as a bug or is this an i
23 matches
Mail list logo
