screensaver and power manager dbus interfaces
dkukawka at suse.de
Fri Jun 2 17:39:54 EEST 2006
On Friday 02 June 2006 15:30, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > Name: setDpmsMode
> > > Args: STRING
> > > value: on 100%
> > > standby <80%
> > > suspend <30W
> > > off <8W
> > > Returns: (nothing)
> > > Description: DPMS is a standard from the VESA consortium for
> > > managing the power supply of monitors.
> > > This call requests a change in the state of DPMS for
> > > the current screen.
> > >
> > > Name: getDpmsMode
> > > Args: (none)
> > > Returns: STRING
> > > Descriptions: Returns the DPMS mode state.
> > > See setDpmsMode().
> > Do we really need them? We have the X extensions/functions for that.
> for the same reason I think we should add the Reboot and keep Shutdown
> methods, I think it's better if apps use only a standard interface for
> all power management-related tasks than having to use dbus for some
> operations, X libs for another, etc. Of course, as you say, this is just
> a convencience wrapper, but that would make it easier for the developer,
> I think.
But then you need to reimplement (nearly) the complete DPMS Extension from the
X-Server (see www.xfree86.org/current/DPMSLib.pdf: DPMSCapable,
DPMSSetTimeouts, DPMSGetTimeouts, DPMSEnable/-Disable ...) if you would make
it easier for the developer and this is simply: "reinvent the wheel".
Do we really need this? IMO not, there is already a library for this issues
and we don't need one more proxy which call at the end a function of this lib
(which is also more expensive than use the lib directly).
More information about the xdg