From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 26 17:54:16 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DF85753 for ; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:54:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-x229.google.com (mail-wg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B538D665AD for ; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:54:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id y19so14878481wgg.0 for ; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 09:54:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1UiucIEI8iotwCWoUlQNqORCULJkY1jxRbKkDQWweiw=; b=HO4lmG6Dsw44bTAy5RMFj6QySgok+zfN1gN0Mg/eInMgIP4nH88OGmQNbpif0Vu+1N sehPIfvfv6/RW8BCyy3IwTAwQyOcZThGEnQjDcPeNp4GhFY92X4LTJ5JHz89FXbqU9sX RzYcKK7OXTdr+HqrQ6MPK5E6bgeQciw/pMyNbBTZsZMYMSOQ5MyopU/QnX052A8tKU6u 2T4G/gJjKexiTSPmHPO3wI+XMIekG2Q3eGOfex/p5iaEMwqhCkVuD7RVmwjdvRBKKCg5 xLmO7OBhI+4JelY70PZQ6TVRnTjn21oFn5gN6RwfdG+enJ7FwhEBkB8D2YWiGYAbC2mI YSkw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.108.9 with SMTP id hg9mr82474423wjb.68.1419616453825; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 09:54:13 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.106.195 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 09:54:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20141226165731.GA28169@workbox.Home> References: <20141226165731.GA28169@workbox.Home> Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 09:54:13 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: DVNE168c3MVcH5pnkRGe9L5b7S4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Lenovo T520: Present (-STABLE) vs. Future (-CURRENT) ACPI Support From: Adrian Chadd To: Bigby James Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:54:16 -0000 Hi! On 26 December 2014 at 08:57, Bigby James wrote: > Howdy-ha, folks, > > Please forgive my ignorance if my question is rather mundane and/or inane. I'm > pretty new to FreeBSD and its development cycle. Here's my situation: I've > recently migrated my laptop (Levovo Thinkpad T520) to FreeBSD using the > 10.1-STABLE snapshot, and most everything works pretty well. The only > exceptions are some of the hardware keys, including the LCD brightness control > keys, which is something I'd really like to have. > > Before going ahead with that install, though, on a lark I decided to try out the > 11-CURRENT snapshot to see how it worked out. As it turns out, everything > presently missing from 10-STABLE worked out of the box on -CURRENT. So I know > that full support for my machine is in the source tree now and, barring any > fundamental changes in the development branch, will be in the next -RELEASE. I > don't really have the time, know-how or guts to maintain a -CURRENT install on > this machine, so for the time being I'm sticking with 10-STABLE. So I'm > wondering just how often ACPI functionality gets moved from the -CURRENT branch > into the most recent release's -STABLE branch. In other words, what are the > chances that the features I'm waiting for will get moved into the 10-STABLE > branch in the near future? Are the ACPI devs pretty conservative with this? For > the time being I can control screen brightness using xrandr, and as fond as I am > with the convenience it is just a convenince all the same, so I can always > remain patient. But I'm wondering if there's a way to know if and when ACPI > functionality will get backported to -STABLE. I currently follow this list and > the SVN mailing list for 10-STABLE, so I can also just keep an eye on them if > that's the answer. Thanks in advance. Thanks for asking! developers backport to freebsd-stable (and earlier branches) whenever they have a need or desire. There's no hard and fast policy requiring it as we're all volunteers and there's noone being paid to maintain or develop laptop / tablet support for FreeBSD. In my particular case I run FreeBSD-HEAD on almost everything, and thus I don't backport things. I have enough limits on my time right now and trying to backport and test everything would be very time consuming. Other developers are different - some will run stable/10 (or stable/9!) and will end up backporting things that they need for whichever hardware they're using. But outside of a handful of strange situations, FreeBSD-HEAD has been remarkably wonderful to use as a desktop for the last 18 months. -adrian