Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)

[Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1320 bytes --]

Hi.

On Monday 20 February 2006 21:15, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 11:33 +0100, Matthias Hensler wrote:
> > That is all I
> > complain about, it means throwing away everything that is working, or
> > easy to get it working, and delaying working hibernate support for
> > another time.
>
> But we have not established that the current implementation does not
> work!  That's a pretty strong assertion to make with zero evidence.

...and that requires defining 'works'.

If we define it as "writes an image of some part of ram to a swap partition 
that can be and does normally get restored on the next boot", then yes, we 
have a working version in the existing vanilla kernel. If however you start 
talking about multiple swap partitions or swap files or ordinary files, about 
reliability or the ability to tune it to fit your system and preferences, 
about the responsiveness of the system post resume or the security of the 
image (IIRC, encryption support has just been removed from swsusp), about the 
ability to get help when you run into trouble or documentation, swsusp 
becomes less of a candidate for 'works'.

Regards,

Nigel

-- 
See our web page for Howtos, FAQs, the Wiki and mailing list info.
http://www.suspend2.net                IRC: #suspend2 on Freenode

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]