Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:59:49 +0100 From: Artur =?utf-8?q?Ba=C4=87?= <artur@ebasoft.com.pl> To: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Need info about ACPI - implementing, done .... Message-ID: <200801310159.49389.artur@ebasoft.com.pl> In-Reply-To: <47A11ACD.8000409@root.org> References: <200801261837.26708.artur@ebasoft.com.pl> <47A073F1.2020701@ebasoft.com.pl> <47A11ACD.8000409@root.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thursday 31 of January 2008 01:48:13 napisałeś(-łaś): > This is a bit off-topic. However, I think the combination of an Bit of topic, but when we take into consideration of 'pnp0c14' solution hiden arguments in some wacpi.sys driver for wmi method in acpi. No responce for my gentle asks for bios,wmi info from fujitsu siemens ... > over-complicated spec and the secrecy/anonymity of OEMs is the real > enabler of acpi problems. You do know that some small shop in Taiwan Dosn't matter if there are problems, but does matter if some gay makes specially such design and decides whitout me how i will be able to use hardware that I OWNS , i payed. > actually defined and built your BIOS, not Phoenix or AMI, right? It dosn't matter for me who in real build my bios hoever this could explain why there is no answer from fujitsu-siemens:) But does matter that there is no portable solution for such cases like my which could be used in FreeBSD to solve problems of many users not few like my and Mikael. -- Artur
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200801310159.49389.artur>