:: tlp-1.7.0-1 and power-profiles-daemon-0.23-1 are in conflict. Remove power-profiles-daemon? [t/N] t
When I read power-profiles-daemon info: “Makes power profiles handling available over D-Bus”. It doesn’t look like it’s any duplication of TLP. Will I lose something when removing power-profiles-daemon?
They should conflict.
If you somehow had them both before then … that was in error - both on your part and the maintainers.
Choose one.
This depends on what you were using before and how it all ‘hung together’.
As already mentioned - those two tools will conflict with eachother … making problems if they are both running, regardless of what the package may say.
Essentially power-profile-daemon gives you the little slider to select ‘power’ or ‘performance’ in the KDE power widget. It should then set your governor.
I find it to be woefully underwhelming in configuration and usage, but some people seem to like it.
TLP and Power Profiles Daemon are two completely different methods of power management. Neither are a one-size-fits-all solution. It depends what hardware one has.
Indeed. The package conflicts were added according to upstream documentation for packagers.
FYI, GNOME (via gnome-control-center), Budgie (via budgie-control-center), KDE (via powerdevil) and COSMIC (via cosmic-settings) all utilize and integrate power profiles.
While GNOME and Budgie use power-profiles-daemon now maintained by Freedesktop, COSMIC uses system76-power and Fedora 41 beta now uses RedHat’s TuneD. All of the above can now provide power-profiles-daemon.
I was thinking of adding the aforementioned to the repos. Installing would look something like this:
❯ sudo pacman -S power-profiles-daemon
:: There are 3 providers available for power-profiles-daemon:
:: Repository extra
1) power-profiles-daemon 2) system76-power 3) tuned-ppd
Enter a number (default=1):
Yes, but, currently … power-profiles-daemon only provides the 3 choices at best, and commonly only 2 choices. And those arent even really configurable.
For me … that means on just about any hardware I care about the power management … I wouldnt be choosing power-profiles-daemon.
Do they?
Like do they actually provide power-profiles-daemon and add some frontend to it?
If not … then I dont think the provides should be in place.
Looking at tuned - I see no reliance or usage of power-profiles-daemon. It seems it can if combined with the optional dep tuned-ppd.
From my limited understanding it would appear these are yet other ways to do these things.
For instance my Dell laptop with a Ryzen 2500U only has Balanced and Power Saver available–which are most likely placeholders as the upstream documentation mentions. However, my System76 laptop with an Intel i7-12700H has Performance, Balanced and Power Saver available.
Yes. Both system76-power and TuneD were recently updated in order to provide the backend for power profile management in COSMIC Settings and Fedora 41 beta’s GNOME Settings respectively the same way Power Profiles Daemon does. Hence the provides.
Having 3 options vs 2 options is not really the issue here.
For me its … that you cant do anything but set one of those options.
Which is … not optimal in the majority of cases.
I understand what ‘provides’ is. Maybe show me the software working that way or a commit or something. ‘Power profile management’ and power-profiles-daemon are not the same thing.
So I am not sure if your answer that its fulfilling that provides is accurate or not.
In fact … if I look at the docs of power-profiles-daemon, for example … there is this bit on comparisons;
By the way, both system76-power and tuned-ppd are in the AUR currently if you’d like to test yourself. You can also check out Fedora 41 beta to see the Tuned integration. You can compare with Fedora 40 which still uses Power Profiles Daemon.
I have already tested system76-power in place of Power Profiles Daemon on my System76 laptop. I have not yet tested Tuned.
Of course, unless one has a System76 laptop, then they should either stick with Power Profiles Daemon or used Tuned. The latter has more advanced configuration possibilities.
While you grown-ups are talking specifics , I still don’t know which one to keep. Frankly, I just get confused by all those options and what they do.
I am currently using TUXEDO laptop and it has an app called TUXEDO Control Center, and I have some profiles there, which allow me to tune:
display brightness (redundant, as Plasma settings already have that)
number of logical cores
minimum and maximum CPU frequency
system profile aka. performance mode, 3 options (not explained what it really does and it doesn’t seem to change any visible settings, no matter what I choose)
if to use maximum performance (no idea what it does any why there is an additional option to performance modes).
All of those above can be set differently for AC or battery.
Additionally, I have Plasma options/slider, without any explanation what it does.
Then I have TLP and that is something different, because if I go through config, I could see a lot of detailed options to set how each hardware components should behave in various conditions.
The problem here is, there are too many options, each doing something different, some things are not explained (or not explained well), so all those things quickly becomes confusing and I don’t know which one to keep, which ones are competing with each other, ect.
If those options were doing the same or similar things, it would be easy to get what it does, but when TLP config looks nothing like Plasma settings, while Tuxedo Control Center does things that TLP seems not to do and do things that I have no idea about and how it ties to Plasma settings (that is supposedly connected through power-profile-deamon) - it’s a mess.