On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 02:18:16PM -0400, Fulko Hew wrote:
>I thought I'd try to ask, because if some Linux developer could tell me
>how/where
>some app like xrandr gets the data, then I could figure out how to
>accomplish
>it on my equivalent system.
xrandr gets it from the X
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:37:41PM -0400, Fulko Hew wrote:
>
> >But thats (unfortunately) exactly what I have to do because the device
> >isn't running Linux. :-(
>
> Yeah, this probably isn't the right place to be asking, then.
>
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:37:41PM -0400, Fulko Hew wrote:
>But thats (unfortunately) exactly what I have to do because the device
>isn't running Linux. :-(
Yeah, this probably isn't the right place to be asking, then.
>I knew it was I2C, but on what bus and 'how do I get there from
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:53:01AM -0400, Fulko Hew wrote:
> >So I'm going to hijack this thread a little and ask if anyone can
> >point me to a resource that can tell me (at the lowest level) what
> >I need to interact with (wh
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 02:05:34PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 09:43:22PM +0200, Dan Horák wrote:
> > Pasi Kärkkäinen píše v ??t 07. 10. 2010 v 22:29 +0300:
> > > On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 10:17:11AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 10:49 +0300,
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 09:43:22PM +0200, Dan Horák wrote:
> Pasi Kärkkäinen píše v ??t 07. 10. 2010 v 22:29 +0300:
> > On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 10:17:11AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 10:49 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > >
> > > > > that bug is already inconvenient
Pasi Kärkkäinen píše v Čt 07. 10. 2010 v 22:29 +0300:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 10:17:11AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 10:49 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> >
> > > > that bug is already inconvenient for some people; if they have laptops
> > > > with bad lid switches i
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 10:17:11AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 10:49 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>
> > > that bug is already inconvenient for some people; if they have laptops
> > > with bad lid switches it'd be much more inconvenient. The only active
> > > display woul
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 10:49 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > that bug is already inconvenient for some people; if they have laptops
> > with bad lid switches it'd be much more inconvenient. The only active
> > display would be the external display they weren't actually using.
>
> I read that bug
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 02:31:22PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 23:32 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>
> > What's the worst thing that can happen when trusting the ACPI lid state?
> >
> > Think about this:
> >
> > - Laptop lid open (so internal lvds enabled), and also ext
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 23:32 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> What's the worst thing that can happen when trusting the ACPI lid state?
>
> Think about this:
>
> - Laptop lid open (so internal lvds enabled), and also external monitor
> connected.
> - lid state is wrong at boot, so it says lid clos
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:33:58PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:03 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:28:43AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32A
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:03 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:28:43AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >
> > > > don't we already have defa
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 07:31:54PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>
> >> > don't we already have default beh
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:28:43AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > > don't we already have default behaviours based on the lid switch,
> > > anyway? So why don't w
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 08:53:12AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:35 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > > Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
> > > implementing it?
> >
> > No, I think what we need to do is to tea
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 06:29:21PM -0600, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
> On 05/10/10 08:40 AM, FlorianFesti wrote:
> > On 10/05/2010 03:15 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >> If the lid is open, both output should be enabled by default (you are
> >> free to manually disable one). If the lid is clo
On 10/06/2010 01:17 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:54:41PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>
>> I'm pretty sure docking stations are irrelevant to this whole thread.
>> The issue is about lids and video outputs. If you think lids are all
>> over the place (as mjg59 points out)
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:54:41PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> I'm pretty sure docking stations are irrelevant to this whole thread.
> The issue is about lids and video outputs. If you think lids are all
> over the place (as mjg59 points out), docks are even worse. Lets not
> drag them in
On 10/06/2010 12:50 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:22:44AM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
>
>> Well, I guess some people would want the laptop to suspend, but it's a
>> very good question. Now all it needs is someone willing and able to
>> write a little patch for me :-)
>
> Do y
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:22:44AM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> Well, I guess some people would want the laptop to suspend, but it's a
> very good question. Now all it needs is someone willing and able to
> write a little patch for me :-)
Do you know which components need patching to make Fedor
On 10/05/2010 09:48 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 10/05/2010 02:35 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>>> Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
>>> implementing it?
>>
>> No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
>> intern
On 05/10/10 08:40 AM, FlorianFesti wrote:
> On 10/05/2010 03:15 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>> If the lid is open, both output should be enabled by default (you are
>> free to manually disable one). If the lid is closed on battery power
>> the system should suspend (unless you choose otherwise
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 07:53:25PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> >> The BIOS generally manages to get that one correct, can we not query
>> >> and keep the current state on boot?
>
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 07:53:25PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> The BIOS generally manages to get that one correct, can we not query
> >> and keep the current state on boot?
> >
> > It really doesn't.
>
> Seems to work just fine from a
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 07:31:54PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > So we could at least cover the case where you plug in an external
>> > monitor, then close the lid? That would be
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 07:31:54PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > So we could at least cover the case where you plug in an external
> > monitor, then close the lid? That would be better than nothing. I assume
> > the problem case is bootin
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 02:27:27PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On 10/05/2010 02:25 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > The range of ways that lid switches can be broken is large. One machine
> > I've seen tries to read from a GPIO that's off by 16, because Intel's
> > GPIO/GPE numbering is comp
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> > don't we already have default behaviours based on the lid switch,
>> > anyway? So why don't we have this pr
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > don't we already have default behaviours based on the lid switch,
> > anyway? So why don't we have this problem with those? IIRC, we default
> > to suspending the syst
On 10/05/2010 02:25 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 02:18:20PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>
>> Agreed, the hardware may lie, but the kernel is the arbiter of truth, at
>> least in this case.
>
> The range of ways that lid switches can be broken is large. One machine
>
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 02:18:20PM -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> Agreed, the hardware may lie, but the kernel is the arbiter of truth, at
> least in this case.
The range of ways that lid switches can be broken is large. One machine
I've seen tries to read from a GPIO that's off by 16, becau
On 10/05/2010 12:18 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:07 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 10:19:04AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:59 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
I think the fun will come from systems that don't properl
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:32AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> don't we already have default behaviours based on the lid switch,
> anyway? So why don't we have this problem with those? IIRC, we default
> to suspending the system when the lid is closed on battery power - so
> are we suspending
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:16:44AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:05 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > No, but there is a use case where you'd want to have an external monitor
> > connected and the system report that the lid is closed, but still have
> > the internal sys
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:07 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 10:19:04AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:59 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > > I think the fun will come from systems that don't properly report their
> > > lid
> > > status. I think
On 10/05/2010 02:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:05 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 08:53:12AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe just 'lid closed and external monitor connected' would be close
>>> enough? Is there a use case where you'd wan
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:05 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 08:53:12AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > Maybe just 'lid closed and external monitor connected' would be close
> > enough? Is there a use case where you'd want to have an external monitor
> > connected and th
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 10:19:04AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:59 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > I think the fun will come from systems that don't properly report their lid
> > status. I think this is one of the complaints from the X developers.
>
> *shrug* those
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 08:53:12AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Maybe just 'lid closed and external monitor connected' would be close
> enough? Is there a use case where you'd want to have an external monitor
> connected and the internal system's lid closed, but still have the
> internal system
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:59 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Yeah, I think this is the main issue. It can cause two problems:
>
> - The login screen appears on the laptop screen (which is closed)
> - New windows or the desktop toolbar appear on the laptop screen (which is
> closed)
>
> I think
On 10/05/2010 09:53 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:35 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>>> Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
>>> implementing it?
>>
>> No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
On 10/05/2010 11:53 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:35 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>>> Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
>>> implementing it?
>>
>> No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 09:35 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
> > implementing it?
>
> No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
> internal panel when docked and with the lid clos
On 10/05/2010 02:35 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
>> implementing it?
>
> No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
> internal panel when docked and with the lid closed. The only m
On 10/05/2010 11:21 AM, Christoph Frieben wrote:
> 2010/10/5 Florian Festi:
>> I wonder if there are latops that can be booted with lid closed and that
>> make a subtle sematic difference between the lid was just being closed
>> and is lid was already closed when we booted up.
>
> IBM ThinkPad T23
2010/10/5 Florian Festi:
> I wonder if there are latops that can be booted with lid closed and that
> make a subtle sematic difference between the lid was just being closed
> and is lid was already closed when we booted up.
IBM ThinkPad T23.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
htt
On 10/05/2010 03:15 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> If the lid is open, both output should be enabled by default (you are
> free to manually disable one). If the lid is closed on battery power
> the system should suspend (unless you choose otherwise in GPM prefs).
>
I wonder if there are latops
On 10/05/2010 09:12 AM, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
> On 05/10/10 07:09 AM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>> On 10/05/2010 09:02 AM, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
>>> On 05/10/10 05:00 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Richard Hughes
wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 09:5
On 05/10/10 07:09 AM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On 10/05/2010 09:02 AM, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
>> On 05/10/10 05:00 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 5 October 2010 09:55, FlorianFesti wrote:
> Sorry for my may be naive questio
On 10/05/2010 09:02 AM, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
> On 05/10/10 05:00 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>>> On 5 October 2010 09:55, FlorianFesti wrote:
Sorry for my may be naive question: Why do we need to know if we are
docked or not
On 05/10/10 05:00 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> On 5 October 2010 09:55, FlorianFesti wrote:
>>> Sorry for my may be naive question: Why do we need to know if we are
>>> docked or not. Isn't there exactly the same situation if the external
>
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 09:55, FlorianFesti wrote:
>> Sorry for my may be naive question: Why do we need to know if we are
>> docked or not. Isn't there exactly the same situation if the external
>> Monitor is directly connected to the laptop? If
On 5 October 2010 09:55, FlorianFesti wrote:
> Sorry for my may be naive question: Why do we need to know if we are
> docked or not. Isn't there exactly the same situation if the external
> Monitor is directly connected to the laptop? If there is an external
> monitor and the lid is closed don't w
On 10/05/2010 10:35 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
> internal panel when docked and with the lid closed. The only missing
> piece is for the kernel to export some kind of sysfs boolean saying
> "in-dock". From talks with mjg59, detec
On 5 October 2010 05:30, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Are we really stuck with gdm/kdm/lxdm/...dm
> implementing it?
No, I think what we need to do is to teach GPM how to turn off the
internal panel when docked and with the lid closed. The only missing
piece is for the kernel to export some kind of s
On 10/4/2010 4:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 10:48 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> I've been trying unsuccessfully for a long to time to try to get this
>> discussion started. Perhaps this just isn't right place? If not, where?
> It's as good a place as any. The X and d
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 10:48 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I've been trying unsuccessfully for a long to time to try to get this
> discussion started. Perhaps this just isn't right place? If not, where?
It's as good a place as any. The X and desktop developers are the people
who can actually f
I've been trying unsuccessfully for a long to time to try to get this
discussion started. Perhaps this just isn't right place? If not, where?
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane
Hello,
I just tried Fedora 14 Beta LIVE CD and noticed things are still problematic
on my setup:
- Laptop with radeon graphics
- Attached to a docking station with external (DVI) monitor.
The lid of the laptop is closed when the laptop is in the docking station,
so only the external monitor is
60 matches
Mail list logo
