Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270654AbTG0CpG (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 22:45:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270655AbTG0CpG (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 22:45:06 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:23247 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270654AbTG0CpE (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 22:45:04 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 20:00:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: "Randy.Dunlap" cc: Tomas Szepe , Subject: Re: [TRIVIAL] sanitize power management config menus In-Reply-To: <20030726194651.5e3f00bb.rddunlap@osdl.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 857 Lines: 22 On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > > 2. APM and ACPI aren't usable together, right? so should the > Kconfig file prevent both of them from being enabled? They aren't used at the same time (as power management, at least), but they should be usable together (ACPI doing things like CPU enumeration, APM doing sleeps), and even more importantly, you should be able to compile both, and if ACPI is disabled or the BIOS doesn't have an ACPI table, the power management should just fall back to APM. So they definitely aren't supposed to be mutually exclusive from a configuration standpoint. Linus - 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/