Re: gnome power manager inhibit



I'd say there are three situations, not just "auto" and "manual":
  1. when it decides for itself if it wants to suspend (idle);
  2. when the user asks it to suspend (clicks "suspend"); and
  3. when the user forces it to suspend (closes lid).

If any applications are inhibiting suspend in case 2, a dialogue should pop up and some protocol should allow the applications inhibiting to Do The Right Thing™ before suspension. Maybe we already do this?

But in case 3, this is unacceptable for the reasons you said -- the user confirmation should either be skipped over, or have a timeout on it.

On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 20:01 -0500, Scott J. Harmon wrote:
Benjamin Gramlich wrote:
> Isn't this discussion a bit moot since gnome has a "suspend inhibit"
> applet that you can turn on in situations when you want to sit back
> and watch a movie or download a .iso image?
>
No.  But I do have to say, I would rather the laptop suspend and kill my
download or file move than have it catch fire in my backpack (i.e. I
closed the lid while it was doing something inhibiting the suspend). 
Surely auto-suspend operates differently than when *I* tell the machine
to suspend (i.e. closing the lid, or clicking suspend).

This whole conversation, I assumed, is about _auto_suspend, not manual
suspend, right?
>
>
> On 10/19/07, *Richard Hughes* <hughsient gmail com
> <mailto:hughsient gmail com>> wrote:
>
>     On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 18:52 +0100, Odysseus Flappington wrote:
>     > It appears to me that how Gnome Power Manager determines whether the
>     > computer idle before it suspends/hibernates could be better
>     designed.
>     > I understand that it is each application's responsibility to inhibit
>     > the computer from sleeping while in use
>     > ( https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GnomePowerManagerInactiveSleep
>     <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GnomePowerManagerInactiveSleep> ), however
>     > there are so few Gnome apps that actually implement this
>     properly that
>     > I'm beginning to believe there must be a better way of doing this.
>
>     Well, we've discussed quite a few ways of doing this in the past -
>     kpowersave just checks a blacklist of processes which is completely
>     wrong way to do it in my opinion. Having a nice interface lets us do
>     clever things.
>
>     > Just a few example of Gnome putting the computer to sleep while
>     doing
>     > stuff, these are off the top of my head and go alongside countless
>     > others that I've come across:
>     > - Firefox when playing Flash.
>
>     Surely you want that to suspend if there's been no movement for 15
>     minutes? flash kills the battery life..
>
>     > - VLC when playing music.
>
>     Rhythmbox already inhibits gnome-power-manager.
>
>     > - Kino while capturing video through firewire.
>
>     Sure, it should do, although it's not dbusified IIRC.
>
>     > - Synaptic Package Manager while downloading packages!
>
>     PackageKit already does this :-) - I think the ubuntu update
>     applet also
>     does an inhibit.
>
>     > - While copying files in Nautilus!
>
>     A bug was files many months ago about that - Nautilus needed to
>     pick up
>     a dbus dep which the maintainers at the time didn't like. I think
>     we can
>     revisit that one now.
>
>     > This is pretty basic laptop stuff, and since equivalent bugs
>     haven't
>     > been reported on Windows and that generally I've never come across
>     > these problems, I would conclude that they've found a more effective
>     > way of implementing this.
>
>     They haven't. Asking each app "can i suspend?" doesn't scale, and it
>     only takes one app to say "no" all the time to get a very hot closed
>     laptop.
>
>     > Are there any plans to look at the design of the suspend/hibernate
>     > mechanisms that Gnome implements and re-work them? What
>     consensus has
>     > been reached regarding this issue already?
>
>     Well, over time more and more stuff uses these interfaces. I think
>     brassereo (sp?) already uses the interface when burning a CD. It's
>     probably a 10 line patch to add this functionality into applications.
>
>     Richard.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     desktop-devel-list mailing list
>     desktop-devel-list gnome org <mailto:desktop-devel-list gnome org>
>     http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Scott.

-- 
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." - Edsger Dijkstra

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]