Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495902 --- Comment #18 from Christoph Wickert <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-06-06 14:31:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) > i would have thought that a script that doesn't require bash, invokes no > external processes (catmoran's invokes two) would be more sophisticated, not > less. :-) i understand your point about max_brightness, but the values i > hard-coded in the hardware, and i see little reason to ask the kernel for the > value, in that case. Agreed, all valid points. > we could -- in fact, the daemon could simply change the permissions itself. > are you concerned that users can't change the brightness themselves? or that > the script runs as root? The former. > should this still use the macro in that case? The macro is useful if we decide to change our arch again, but as long as you are following Fedora's development you can also use BuildArch: i386 again, I don't really mind. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review