From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262065AbUB2QX3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:23:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262068AbUB2QX3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:23:29 -0500 Received: from gprs154-126.eurotel.cz ([160.218.154.126]:41601 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262065AbUB2QX2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:23:28 -0500 Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 17:23:17 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Karol Kozimor Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Dropping CONFIG_PM_DISK? Message-ID: <20040229162317.GC283@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1ulUA-33w-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <20040229161721.GA16688@hell.org.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040229161721.GA16688@hell.org.pl> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > Would there be any major screaming if I tried to drop CONFIG_PM_DISK? > > It seems noone is maintaining it, equivalent functionality is provided > > by swsusp, and it is confusing users... > > It may be ugly, it may be unmaintained, but I get the impression that it > works for some people for whom swsusp doesn't. So unless swsusp works for > everyone or Nigel's swsusp2 is merged, I'd suggest leaving that in. Do you have example when pmdisk works and swsusp does not? I'm not aware of any in recent history... Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]