From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 17 21:15:00 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB79106566C for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:15:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zb@ispid.com.pl) Received: from v005705.home.net.pl (v005705.home.net.pl [212.85.118.117]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BFE558FC17 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:14:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zb@ispid.com.pl) Received: from 444.net.autocom.pl (HELO localhost) (zb.ispid@onet@77.236.6.157) by m022.home.net.pl with SMTP; Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:14:56 -0000 Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:14:57 +0200 From: Zbigniew Baniewski To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080817211457.GA7221@sarge.my.own.domain.no-net> References: <20080421095156.GA5263@sarge.my.own.domain.no-net> <58AFE814-343F-4F83-94DA-A2979180C512@FreeBSD.org> <20080424171712.GA5180@sarge.my.own.domain.no-net> <20080424234921.GR92261@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <48114123.3000708@root.org> <20080815141355.GA5116@sarge.my.own.domain.no-net> <20080815155953.GA5044@sarge.my.own.domain.no-net> <20080816225146.GP25055@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20080816231154.GA6333@sarge.my.own.domain.no-net> <20080817202816.GB1013@epsilon.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080817202816.GB1013@epsilon.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Subject: Re: Problem with ACPI using Abit BE6-II V2.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:15:00 -0000 On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 09:28:16PM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote: > It's not the fact that something is not broken. Something is broken and it's > your hardware, from what I can see. > We can develop workarounds in software for bad hardware implementations, but, > generally, these need to be well tested and, usually, those folks that have > the bad hardware are those who develop the patches. If you didn't notice: I'm trying to explain, that it was here already - but now it disappeared. -- pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski