Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 19:01:56 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Marek Zarychta <zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> Cc: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reasons for keeping sc(4) and libvgl ? Message-ID: <202206211901.25LJ1uBd067376@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <3d09c86a-9840-f8bf-4725-8098d958a01d@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> References: <20211126160454.3eb827365a02103169ab9adc@bidouilliste.com> <20220621201924.e9b96876c947140ac1f3b7a4@bidouilliste.com> <3d09c86a-9840-f8bf-4725-8098d958a01d@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-------- Marek Zarychta writes: > Thanks for heads up. Unfortunately, it will be a great loss. The waste > of power resources might increase since vt(4) still doesn't support VESA > Display Power Management Signaling [...] But the operative word there is "still", isn't it ? There is nothing which prevents vt(4) from doing the right thing is there ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202206211901.25LJ1uBd067376>