<matt@3am-software.com> (Matt Thomas) writes:

> I'd like to split the current APM code into a MI front-end which handles the
> /dev/apm device and the MD backend which handles the real work.  The other
> reason for this is so that architectures that may have multiple mechanisms
> can only attach the currently active mechanism (kind of like how /dev/fb 
> attaches to the console).  

I have a minor concern: APM is specifically the name for the
power-management system used on i386 boxes; does it make sense to call
power management facilites on other systems (like your SPARC) "APM"?
From what I know of APM I have to believe that the SPARC power
management mechanisim is totally different.

Is the apm(4) interface actually appropriate for the SPARC's power
management facilites? How close a fit is it? 

	- Nathan