"Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com> writes:
> I know there's talk of the "right" way to talk to the acpi drivers, but 
> even when something like that is finished, I think we'll still need 
> something that provides the same API as /dev/apm, just to preserve all 
> the tools that know how to use it.  (I'd love to try acpi on my laptop, 
> but if I can't even check the battery status it's a non-starter.)

There isn't really that much infrastructure that uses APM, and it
appears ACPI needs a lot more infrastructure than APM provides. In
particular, ACPI requires that the OS handle things like powering down
idle devices, so ultimately our user tools will need to permit
registration of power management policies. This goes far beyond the
tiny amount of code in apmd etc.

Perry