[Pm-utils] [RFC] [patch review] Hook independence and security fixups, part 1
victor.lowther at gmail.com
Sun Feb 3 14:00:03 PST 2008
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 22:16 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> 2008/2/3, Dan Nicholson <dbn.lists at gmail.com>:
> > They can also "do the right thing" by adding 40 line patch to
> > pm-utils. IMO, having an API is overkill, adding complexity and
> > codepaths to a conceptually simple idea.
> I have to agree here. We should just add the implementations for
> userspace, kernel and tuxonice (and pmu) directly in pm-utils.
> Everything else seems overkill and over-engineered to me.
More information about the Pm-utils