[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b69d1470701250803q27d742a9o3d04a710d61f3e60@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:03:05 -0600
From: "Scott Preece" <sepreece@...il.com>
To: "Alessandro Di Marco" <dmr@....it>
Cc: 7eggert@....de, "Pavel Machek" <pavel@....cz>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vojtech@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] System Inactivity Monitor v1.0
On 1/25/07, Alessandro Di Marco <dmr@....it> wrote:
> "Scott Preece" <sepreece@...il.com> writes:
>
> On 1/25/07, Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de> wrote:
> > Imagine one computer serving two users. Two monitors, two keyboards ...
> ---
>
> Good point! Of late I've been working on single-user systems, so it
> was not at the front of my brain, despite years of building and using
> multi-user systems.
>
> It's a point that multi-user systems have struggled with forever (when
> somebody inserts a CR in the drive mounted in the system box, which user do
> you pop up a media player for?).
>
> sed s/user X's screensaver/suspend to disk/g <<EOF
>
> I tend to think it's not a kernel-vs-user-space issue, though. To
> solve it you need, somewhere, a notion of a "user session" and you
> need some way to separate system-level issues (like low-battery) from
> user-level issues (like activiating user X's screensaver).
>
> EOF
>
> Are you sure?
---
Well, a screensaver is associated with a particular user (and screen),
but suspend-to-disk is a system-wide activity that would affect all
the users. So you need to be able to separate those notions in
deciding what actions to take.
scott
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists