On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:39:00 -0300 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Len Brown wrote: > > > +config ACPI_IBM_BAY > > > > Should this depend on ACPI_BAY=n? > > It should allow both as modules, so that the user can choose which one to > run. Doesn't this option enable support for controlling the bay device via ibm_acpi? If so - if you compile this one, then the user who chooses to use bay.ko instead to control the bay can not use ibm_acpi at all to control the remaining functionality. I feel this should be dependent on ACPI_BAY=n. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ ibm-acpi-devel mailing list ibm-acpi-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ibm-acpi-devel
