From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263463AbTJaR4Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:56:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263468AbTJaR4Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:56:16 -0500 Received: from gort.metaparadigm.com ([203.117.131.12]:14541 "EHLO gort.metaparadigm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263463AbTJaR4O (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:56:14 -0500 Message-ID: <3FA2A240.2060105@metaparadigm.com> Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 01:56:16 +0800 From: Michael Clark Organization: Metaparadigm Pte Ltd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031024 Debian/1.5-2 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Soboroff Cc: Linux Kernel Subject: Re: Post-halloween doc updates. References: <20031030141519.GA10700@redhat.com> <9cfd6cdla4o.fsf@rogue.ncsl.nist.gov> <20031031152453.F4556@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <9cfn0bhjswn.fsf@rogue.ncsl.nist.gov> In-Reply-To: <9cfn0bhjswn.fsf@rogue.ncsl.nist.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/01/03 00:03, Ian Soboroff wrote: > Russell King writes: > > >>On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 10:06:31AM -0500, Ian Soboroff wrote: >> >>>And APM suspend seems to have broken in -test8. Does it work for >>>anyone? >> >>Doesn't work for me. APM working here nicely with -test9 on Thinkpad A31. Stilling getting 1394 badness when suspending/resuming with my cardbus 1394 controller plugged in. Other than that, works pretty seamlessy with no cardbus cards plugged. Even radeon with VESA suspend/resume, DRI and X 4.3 (using some precarious vtswitch calls in /etc/apm/event.d/). wlan-ng works okay although it requires rmmod/modprobe to wake up properly after resume. >>Now, taking off my "open source co-operative hat" and placing my >>"reality" hat on, I'd suggest that anyone who finds that APM doesn't >>work to consider it a dead loss - It's an obsolete technology, and >>therefore no one is interested in it anymore. I've reported the >>problem multiple times here and there's been very little, if any, >>reaction, so this seems to back that up. Hmmm, well for me; a working APM (here) is much prefered to non- working ACPI suspend/resume. I'd prefer not to obsolete APM until there is a working alternative (with mature userspace tools). ~mc