Re: apm
Stephen.Rothwell@canb.auug.org.au
Wed, 11 Dec 1996 11:32:17 +1100
dhinds@hyper.stanford.edu (David Hinds) writes:
>
> Marty Leisner (leisner@sdsp.mc.xerox.com) wrote:
>
> : Is there a reason apm isn't a module? (I'm running 2.0.26).
>
> Once upon a time, APM could be compiled as a module, but the feature
> was later removed (a mistake in my opinion). APM support requires a
> few changes in other parts of the kernel so turning it back into a
> module now is slightly tricky. I was actually working on it
> yesterday.
The reason it was removed was that I could never get it to work!
It would always crash when the module was removed. This was probably
a lack of understanding on my part.
Also, at least part of the APM stuff needs to be compiled in as it has
to probe the BIOS at startup time (in real mode).
If you get (the possible part) to work as a module, great!
Cheers,
Stephen
--
Stephen Rothwell Stephen.Rothwell@canb.auug.org.au
Canberra, Australia