Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Nov 2002 19:47:11 +0000 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: 2.5.45 build failed with ACPI turned on |
| |
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 11:37:26AM -0800, Grover, Andrew wrote: > ACPI implements PM but that's not all it implements. Is making CONFIG_PM > true if ACPI or APM are on a viable option? I think that would more > accurately reflect reality. > > Or can we get rid of CONFIG_PM?
I'm not sure of places that do it off the top of my head, but CONFIG_PM would save us having to do ugly CONFIG_APM || CONFIG_ACPI tests.
Dave
-- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |