Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 26 May 2010 15:39:48 +0200 | From | Florian Mickler <> | Subject | Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) |
| |
On Wed, 26 May 2010 14:19:42 +0100 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > This is a _big_ plus for attracting 3rd party programs. (And of course > > the thing you don't like). > > You would do better to concentrate on technical issues that the > assignment of malicious intent to other parties. > > Alan
This was nothing the kind of! He explicitly said this:
On Wed, 26 May 2010 15:29:32 +0300 Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com> wrote:
> What I find ridiculous is the assumption that kernel should provide good > power management even for badly written applications. They should work, > of course, but there's no assumption that the kernel should cope with > those applications and provide good battery usage on those cases.
And I responded that if the kernel would do this, then that would be a "_big_ plus for attracting 3d party programs".
I had no intent in attacking anyone or putting word's in someones mouth. Sorry if this was unclearly written.
Cheers, Flo
| |