Critial battery suspension on full battery

[Jackyboy86]

Binary package hint: gnome-power-manager

Just upgraded to Lucid a couple of days ago - given it time to get used to accurately reporting battery life, but whenever I unplug, it claims that i've got critical battery life, and suspends.
The applet is reporting the battery charge accurately (25.7 W), but still tries to suspend.

Seems to be a return of bug #33072?

Running Dell Mini 10

[Chris Coulson (chrisccoulson)]

Thank you for your bug report. Please run "killall gnome-power-manager && gnome-power-manager --verbose 2>&1 | tee ~/gpm.log", then disconnect your power cord, allow it to suspend and then attach the resulting log file to this bug report after resuming

[Jackyboy86 (jrgholroyde)]

Thanks. Log attached.
For clarification, it only appears to affect when the computer is charging (between 1%-99% charge)
Ta

[Konstantin Lavrov (lacosta)]

Here is the reason:
 energy-rate: 791.681 W

The same case like mine.

In fact there are bugs already filled where I already made my comment. All those bugs about that suspend or hibernation is happened after AC is removed.

Here is from my comment in #516023:

There are laptops that have enormous peak in energy consumption while being plug to or unplugged from AC power.

Look at screenshoot from gnome-power-statistic: energy-rate is more then 0,7kW

When cable was unplugged calculated time-to-empty is wrong and very small. But g-p-m reacts on this event and do what is set in prefs.

To avoid suspend or hibernating I turn off time policy:
gconftool-2 --type bool --set /apps/gnome-power-manager/general/use_time_for_policy false

 In this case 'Critical low battery' event not happen because percentage is correct. But 'Battery discharging' notification still shows wrong minutes and right percentage: 1 minute of battery power remaining (99%)

Actually this energy-rate jump not g-p-m related (I filled bug 531190 against upower), but anyway this behavior of g-p-m is very annoying.

[David Tombs (dgtombs)]

Konstantin: Thanks for your work on this. Since I believe g-p-m is behaving correctly here, I'm going to mark this a duplicate.