Plans for hal 0.5.x

[Sjoerd Simons]

On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 10:21:39AM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 11:17 +0100, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> > But it probably won't be really an addon, because we want it to work too
> > when there is no hal for whatever reason.
> > 
> 
> Well, yeah, the ideal interface for handling addons should be something
> simple like just managing the lifecycle of said addons. So, e.g. if I
> got a hal device object with
> 
>  info.addon.<some-unique-addon-type> = /usr/sbin/pmu-hal-polling
> 
> then hald (some other component invoked by hald, probably) will ensure
> that there is exactly one copy running for each hal device object with
> the above line. The lifecycle is managed with fork/exec and kill; if the
> invoked program exits prematurely (e.g. not being killed by hald), then
> so be it.

Is there a reason to have it run as an addon, when it would just run
continously otherwise ? A pmu is not something one hotplugs afaik :)

The idea i was having is to just let it push it's info into hal when it sees
the service is available.

  Sjoerd
-- 
Going the speed of light is bad for your age.
_______________________________________________
hal mailing list
hal at lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/hal