[karmic regression] APM: gnome-power-manager does not recognize state of APM-only (non-ACPI) systems

[Jeremy Sequoia]

Binary package hint: gnome-power-manager

gnome-power-manager reports that my PowerMac G4 is connected to AC when in fact it is on battery. This is a regresison from Jaunty which correctly reported its status and handled change to a low-power state.

jeremy@aeris:~$ cat /proc/apm
1.13 1.2 0x02 0x00 0x00 0x01 98% 72 min

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

powersaved works as a workaround for dimming the screen, etc ... but it would be nice if gnome-power-manager could be updated to correctly show the status.

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

I was told that this isn't an issue in gnome-power-manager but probably a misconfiguration in HAL, since gnome-power-manager is abstracted above the APM/ACPI barrier... I have not confirmed this, however.

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

BTW, the XFCE Power Manager works as expected and properly detects the state.

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

ping. This is a fairly annoying regression with Karmic/Gnome

[Pedro Villavicencio (pedro)]

Thanks for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. Could you please open a terminal and execute: apport-collect 414357 ? It will attach the necessary information to this report. Also you can submit more information for it by looking to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingGNOMEPowerManager , Thanks in advance.

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

Architecture: powerpc
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
Package: gnome-power-manager 2.28.1-0ubuntu1
PackageArchitecture: powerpc
ProcEnviron:
 SHELL=/bin/bash
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-14.48-powerpc
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-14-powerpc ppc
UserGroups:

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

Distro version: squeeze/sid
Kernel version: 2.6.31-14-powerpc
g-p-m version: 2.28.1
HAL version: 0.5.13
System manufacturer: missing
System version: missing
System product: missing
AC adapter present: yes
Battery present: yes
Laptop panel present: yes
CPU scaling present: yes
Battery Information:
  battery.charge_level.current = 2198 (0x896) (int)
  battery.charge_level.design = 2271 (0x8df) (int)
  battery.charge_level.last_full = 2271 (0x8df) (int)
  battery.charge_level.percentage = 96 (0x60) (int)
  battery.charge_level.rate = 0 (0x0) (int)
  battery.is_rechargeable = true (bool)
  battery.present = true (bool)
  battery.rechargeable.is_charging = false (bool)
  battery.rechargeable.is_discharging = false (bool)
  battery.technology = 'unknown' (string)
  battery.type = 'primary' (string)
DeviceKit data:
Daemon:
  daemon-version: 011
  can-suspend: yes
  can-hibernate yes
  on-battery: no
  on-low-battery: no
  lid-is-closed: no
  lid-is-present: yes
GNOME Power Manager Process Information:
gdm 2112 0.0 0.8 31392 9140 ? S Jan11 0:05 | \_ gnome-power-manager
HAL Process Information:
111 7596 0.0 0.4 8008 4256 ? Ss Jan11 0:03 hald --daemon=yes
root 7597 0.0 0.1 4332 1444 ? S Jan11 0:00 \_ hald-runner
root 7633 0.0 0.1 4476 1360 ? S Jan11 0:00 \_ /usr/lib/hal/hald-addon-generic-backlight
root 7634 0.0 0.1 4472 1328 ? S Jan11 0:00 \_ /usr/lib/hal/hald-addon-rfkill-killswitch
root 7635 0.0 0.1 4476 1332 ? S Jan11 0:00 \_ /usr/lib/hal/hald-addon-leds
111 7644 0.0 0.1 4384 1316 ? S Jan11 0:03 \_ /usr/lib/hal/hald-addon-pmu
root 7645 0.0 0.1 4492 1384 ? S Jan11 0:00 \_ /usr/lib/hal/hald-addon-cpufreq
root 7656 0.0 0.1 4480 1360 ? S Jan11 0:01 \_ hald-addon-storage: polling /dev/hdc (every 2 sec)
root 7660 0.0 0.1 4476 1348 ? S Jan11 0:00 \_ hald-addon-input: Listening on /dev/input/event2 /dev/input/event3 /dev/input/event1

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

As mentioned, xfce notices the state correctly, so I believe it's a problem with gpm or something that gpm depends on that xfce's power manager doesn't

[Pedro Villavicencio (pedro)]

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. A new version of Gnome Power Manager is available on Maverick and we are wondering if this bug is still an issue for you with that version? Could you please test and comment back? Thanks in advance.

[Jeremy Sequoia (jeremyhu)]

yes, it is still a problem with Gnome. XFCE's widget acts as expected and is still a good work around.