From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 11 14:20:28 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A2216A436;
	Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:20:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from speedfactory.net (mail6.speedfactory.net [66.23.216.219])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D8CC43D46;
	Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:20:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from server.baldwin.cx (unverified [66.23.211.162]) 
	by speedfactory.net (SurgeMail 3.5b3) with ESMTP id 5794943 
	for multiple; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:18:50 -0500
Received: from zion.baldwin.cx (zion.baldwin.cx [192.168.0.7])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0BEKM4E071494;
	Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:20:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:08:15 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3
References: <20060103155509.GE13887@poupinou.org>
	<200601101626.11902.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<cone.1136955282.570697.51434.1000@zoraida.natserv.net>
In-Reply-To: <cone.1136955282.570697.51434.1000@zoraida.natserv.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200601110908.17883.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1238/Wed Jan 11 05:19:06 2006 on
	server.baldwin.cx
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed 
	version=3.1.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on server.baldwin.cx
X-Server: High Performance Mail Server - http://surgemail.com r=1653887525
Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org, Nate Lawson <njl@freebsd.org>,
	Ariff Abdullah <ariff@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: No APM yet for AMD?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: ACPI and power management development <freebsd-acpi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:20:29 -0000

On Tuesday 10 January 2006 11:54 pm, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> John Baldwin writes:
> > Eh?  You do realize that right now all I have is '-1'
>
> I am totally lost...
> What is wrong with Ariff's patch?
> http://people.freebsd.org/~ariff/acpi/acpiconf.c.diff
>
> State:                  charging
> Present rate:           unknown
> Remaining capacity:     62%
> Voltage:                unknown
> AC line:                on-line
>
> > charging rate and the remaining time to full charge, etc.) but it would
> > give a somewhat decent estimate that would basically be based on what
> > your usage was in the last sample time.
>
> OK. I understand better now.
> Would this be more accurate than Ariff's patch?

My idea is orthogonal.  My system does report a remaining capacity, just no=
t=20
the discharge rate.  Some poorly written programs (like kde's laptop daemon=
)=20
only work if they get a time, and a time is more easily parsed by humans.

=2D-=20
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> =A0<>< =A0http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve" =A0=3D =A0http://www.FreeBSD.org