lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> > > o "Power-aware application" are applications that are permitted
> > > to acquire suspend blockers on Android. Verion 8 of the
> > > suspend-blocker patch seems to use group permissions to
> > > determine which applications are classified as power aware.
> > >
> > > More generally, power-aware applications seem to be those that
> > > have permission to exert some control over the system's
> > > power state.
> >
> > I don't like the term "Power aware application". An application is well
> > behaved or it isn't. "aware" has nothing to do with it.
>
> Applications are often complex enough to be aware of some things, naive
> about others, well behaved in some ways, and ill-behaved in others.
> This has been the case for some decades now, so it should not come as
> a surprise.
>
> I am of course open to suggestions for alternatives to the term "power
> aware application", but most definitely not to obfuscating the difference
> between power awareness (or whatever name one wishes to call it) and
> the overall quality of the application, whatever "quality" might mean
> in a given context.

This is a false dichotomy. The two of you have fallen into a logical
trap. I forget the word used to describe an argument based on a
fundamental misunderstanding, but it applies here.

The term "power-aware" has _nothing_ to do with how well behaved an
application is, or its quality (in any sense). Go back and re-read the
definition; you'll see what I mean.

Alan Stern



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-08-01 21:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans