Re: HP G60-249WM Notebook overheats (on lenny)
On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 00:34 +0200, Klistvud wrote:
> Well, the script is quite simple, it only works in Gnome (a
> more system-wide script would have to be run as superuser and I just
> couldn't be bothered to type in my root password every time I wanted to
> change CPU governor):
>
> <script to copy/paste:>
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> state=`gconftool --get /apps/gnome-power-manager/cpufreq/policy_ac |
> cut -d\ -f1`
>
> if [ $state == "ondemand" ]; then
> countdown=`echo {99..1}`
> gconftool --type string --set /apps/gnome-power-manager/cpufreq/
> policy_ac "powersave"
> gconftool --type int --set /apps/gnome-power-manager/backlight/
> brightness_ac "50"
> else
> countdown=`echo {1..99}`
> gconftool --type string --set /apps/gnome-power-manager/cpufreq/
> policy_ac "ondemand"
> gconftool --type int --set /apps/gnome-power-manager/backlight/
> brightness_ac "95"
> fi
>
> state=`gconftool --get /apps/gnome-power-manager/cpufreq/policy_ac |
> cut -d\ -f1`
>
> for i in $countdown; do echo $i; sleep 0.01; echo "#";done|zenity --
> progress --auto-close --title=$state
> echo CPU governor switched to $state.
>
> </end of script to copy/paste>
>
> The script is self-explanatory. You save it under a name of your choice
> (say, CPU_governor_toggle), set its executable bit, ... you know the
> drill.
>
>
I did have to read a few man and gnome help pages to understand what the
script does, but as scripts go, yes it's fairly straightforward (and
I've already made a few modifications to suit my tastes). Thank you for
showing me this. I didn't realize gnome-power-manager had cpufreq
settings. One more reason to explore gconf-editor.
I also want to apologize for taking 4 days to respond. I thought it
would be best to wait until I had tried using the vacuum, but still
haven't gotten around to it. I don't have carpeted floors where I live,
so I don't have easy access to one; but I'll try to borrow one tomorrow
and let you know what happens.
> --
> Regards,
>
> Klistvud
> Certifiable Loonix User #481801
>
>
Thanks again,
Brian
Reply to: