preparing pcf50633 for upstream

Balaji Rao balaji at
Thu Oct 2 19:22:15 CEST 2008

On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:07:31 +0100
Andy Green <andy at> wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> | Mike (mwester) wrote:
> |> Dunno.  Sadly, user-space has splintered into several different
> images, |> with variants on those (someone mentioned eight distinct
> images the |> other day)
> |
> | Urgh :-(
> One of the happiest things I saw on GTA02 was Debian.  I think it is
> great that folks are learning and driving things their own way with
> multiple distros instead of "Openmoko Windows XP" only.  Over time
> they'll converge on the better stuff.
> |> And if none of the above makes any sense, I've just proven how
> confusing |> this all is to me!
> |
> | It seems that we all agree that the APM interface should go. That's
> Someone needs to test that the "apm" applet that folks are using in
> userspace does not actually need APM emulation in kernel.  It kinda
> sounds like they should be related.
> Why don't you cook a kernel with the APM emulation unconfigured, and
> test it?

I've commented out the apm emulation code in pcf50633.c and
apm_get_power_status set to NULL. This kernel booted up fine. But when
I ran the "apm" command, it said "Battery critically low" or something
like that, a false positive.

How exactly do I test it ?

	- Balaji

More information about the openmoko-kernel mailing list