From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261227AbVGGMRz (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2005 08:17:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261320AbVGGMP0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2005 08:15:26 -0400 Received: from [203.171.93.254] ([203.171.93.254]:65193 "EHLO cunningham.myip.net.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261295AbVGGMOC (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jul 2005 08:14:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [0/48] Suspend2 2.1.9.8 for 2.6.12 From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: ncunningham@cyclades.com To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <11206164393426@foobar.com> <20050706082230.GF1412@elf.ucw.cz> <20050706082230.GF1412@elf.ucw.cz> <1120696047.4860.525.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Cycades Message-Id: <1120738525.4860.1433.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6-1mdk Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 22:15:25 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 22:04, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > I've been thinking about this some more and wondering whether I should > > just replace swsusp. I really don't want to step on your toes though. > > What would you like to see happen? > > Do you implement the entire swsusp userspace interface? If not, removing > it probably isn't a reasonable plan without fair warning. I'm not suggesting removing the sysfs interface or replacing system to ram - just the suspend to disk part. Regards, Nigel -- Evolution. Enumerate the requirements. Consider the interdependencies. Calculate the probabilities. Be amazed that people believe it happened.