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

Re: Debian 3.0r0 wont 'powerdown'



On Tuesday 30 July 2002 02:19 pm, Ron Stordahl wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 04:08:20PM -0500, Ron Stordahl wrote:
> > > Further testing on 2 other system (Intel 810 series MB and ASUS P4)
> > > also fail to power off with Debian 3.0.r0 (with the changes noted). 
> > > Also
>
> fails
>
> > > with Mandrake 9.0 beta (where I reported the problem to the 'cooker')
>
> and
>
> > > Red Hat - Limbo beta (where I filed the report with bugzilla). As I
> > > said
>
> all
>
> > > power down with Win9X.  Perhaps someone will come up with the answer.
> >
> > Perhaps your system uses ACPI rather than APM for power management. They
> > can't both be compiled into the kernel at the same time, so you'll have
> > to recompile.
>
> You may well be correct, however clearly its possible for software to
> determine this an act accordingly, Win9X does manage it.
>
> Ill use the power button, as primitive as it seems, until a future release
> handles this.
>

there are methods to enable this and you've been advised of the means that 
would lead you to a solution. future releases are going to require just as 
much resourcefulness on your part as this one does. the impression you 
create, given your reticence towards learning, suggests that you might be 
happier with lindows. if your current response to the help that you've been 
offered is any measure of your future participation on this list, don't be 
surprised if some of us are reticent to respond. this is not intended as a 
rebuke of your interest in debian, more as an advisory that windows 
[dis]functionality is not the standard to which anyone here aspires. to give 
you a clear indication of the difference, try calling m$ support to request 
the code that enables the functionality you desire.

the only thing primitive here is your lack of grace in response to the help 
you've been offered. you'll get much further here, and in the rest of your 
life, if you lose that.

ben



Reply to: