[openbeos] Re: power_daemon vs _server.
- From: "Mikael Jansson (mailing lists)" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 19:32:46 +0100 CET
"Nathan Whitehorn" <nathanw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > Heya,
> >
> > Shouldn't power_daemon really be named power_server as the rest of
> > the
> > Haiku servers? Daemon is a UNIXy thing, and they usually just
> > append
> > "d"
> > at the end of the name, i.e., powerd. We'd use power_server.
> >
> > Or... what's the rationale behind choosing the name "power_daemon",
> > Nathan?
>
> I chose _daemon obecause it just sits and looks at things that are
> happening, and doesn't really provide services to any other system
> components -- it manages them instead. Plus, I'm used to that suffix
> from the mail_daemon. If anyone really cares, I'll change it, but it
> seems like no one does, judging by the e-mails about plutonium
> powered
> laptops and Austen Powers.
>
I never even thought of mail_daemon. Okay, you hereby have my
permission to name it power_daemon. ;)
How will the updated framework look like? Will there be a new hook for
each ACPI mode, or will they receive B_ACPI_... messages in their
_ioctl()?
--
Mikael Jansson
http://mikael.jansson.be
Other related posts:
