[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Shutdown/switching computer power off automatically ?



On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:54:04PM -0700, Akop Pogosian wrote:
> On Thu, 3 May 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> > Well, this distro _does_ include APM support compiled into the kernel.
> > However, that support is turned off by default because it's insane to
> > not support the least common denominator.
> >
> > If you read the thread you'll see lots of folks suggesting the
> > "apm=on" append line or kernel boot argument ... that turns on the APM
> > support that's in the stock kernel :)
> >
> > In short, you didn't have to recompile the kernel to get APM, though
> > there are plenty of good reasons to compile your own kernel IMO.
> 
> It looks like you have to recompile the kernel to get that feature.  I
> use kernel-image-2.4.4-1 (supposedly unstable package ported to
> potato) and it does not seem to have apm support enabled.

APM support was included in the stock 2.2.x kernels.  Since we're
talking about potato I think my statement stands.
 
> root@ping:~# apmd
> No APM support in kernel
> 
> "dmesg" doesn't show any apm related messages.  Yes, I could recompile
> the kernel but I really don't like doing that when I administer a
> large number of not very identically configured systems. It seems to
> be very inflexible having to recompile the kernel just to get
> poweroff to work.

Did you try acpid instead?

I don't understand why everyone thinks it's so hard to compile kernels
... kernel-package makes it trivial.  Since you end up with a deb it
doesn't matter if you want to install on one machine or 1000 ...

BTW, your mailer appears to be broken as it completely ignored my
Mail-Followup-To: header.  I read the lists and I neither need nor
appreciate Cc:s

-- 
Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better
Micromuse Ltd.                 | than a perfect plan tomorrow.
mailto:nnorman@micromuse.com   |   -- Patton

Attachment: pgpiUfMk5vFOa.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: