Re: Sarge: Klaptopd dislikes battery (2.6.7)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ja hallo erstmal,....
Am Dienstag, 6. Juli 2004 10:47 schrieb Bruno Ducrot:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 02:54:57PM +0200, Christian Heim wrote:
> > Am Montag, 5. Juli 2004 10:48 schrieb Jan L?hr:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > sadly I have some trouble with KLaptopd (Sarge: KDE 3.2.2-afaik - well
> > > however why does dpkg -l kde say 3.1.2 and dpkg -l kmail & kcontrol say
> > > 3.2.2 ?;) on my new Acer 291 LCI (tmate).
> > > Somehow the battery is not recognised correctly with 2.6.7 ACPI (cat
> > > state tells me it is discharging with a rate of 0).
> > > Thus(?) KLaptopd have some trouble analysing the remaining capacity and
> > > logs off the user directly after login. (Needless to say the I didn't
> > > set any battary low, battery critical, etc) action in kcontrol.
> > > What's going wrong here?
> >
> > It's because of the lack in Acer's BIOS information. Has nothing to do
> > with Klaptopd
> I agree with you that the BIOS in this case do not give the rate value,
> but that's not a reason for klaptop to give up. The rate value is only
> indicative anyway and is most of time not accurate enough to deduce the
> remaining time for example.
Well, I've discovered some other strange "feauters". After boot, the voltage,
remaining capacity etc. is displayed correctly. After a while the voltage and
the remaining capacity jumps (! - I see no progress) up and stays at that
level. (The voltage is higher than the desgin-voltage and the remaining
capacity higher than boottime)
What's going mad here?
Do you have any ideas or advices?
Keep smiling
yanosz
- --
Achtung Adressfälschungen! Daher gilt:
"Jans Echte" - Nur echt mit der Signatur.
Infos siehe: http://www.luehr.mynetcologne.de/echeck.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)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=2g3Q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: