Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 863 bytes --]

Hi everyone.

Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from

http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz2

This is the first stable release since switching to sharing the lowlevel code 
with swsusp. It means that I'm now more dependent on Rafael and Pavel not 
changing things in an incompatible way, but it is a gain in that it reduces 
the amount of code that needs to be maintained by approximately 1000 lines.

Since I announced my new job a few weeks ago, the impetus to seek to merge 
Suspend2 has been renewed. I'm currently building a git tree to this end. 
It's not yet publicly available because I'm using stgit and am sometimes 
modifying earlier patches in the series and rebasing it against later 
versions of Linus' tree, but once it's done, I'll let people know where to 
find it.

Regards,

Nigel

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

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Pavel Machek]

On Út 28-03-06 16:01:14, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi everyone.
> 
> Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> 
> http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz2
> 
> This is the first stable release since switching to sharing the lowlevel code 
> with swsusp. It means that I'm now more dependent on Rafael and Pavel not 
> changing things in an incompatible way, but it is a gain in that it reduces 
> the amount of code that needs to be maintained by approximately 1000 lines.

Nice, thanks.
									Pavel
-- 
Picture of sleeping (Linux) penguin wanted...

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Mark Lord]

Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi everyone.
> 
> Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> 
> http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz2

Wow!  Is this ever freaking fast!
Try it folks.  Once you do, you'll never go back to the slow way!

Cheers

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Pavel Machek]

On Út 28-03-06 18:51:51, Mark Lord wrote:
> Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> >Hi everyone.
> >
> >Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> >
> >http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz2
> 
> Wow!  Is this ever freaking fast!
> Try it folks.  Once you do, you'll never go back to the slow way!

Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
needing big kernel patch.
								Pavel
-- 
Picture of sleeping (Linux) penguin wanted...

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 661 bytes --]

Hi.

On Wednesday 29 March 2006 19:19, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Út 28-03-06 18:51:51, Mark Lord wrote:
> > Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > >Hi everyone.
> > >
> > >Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> > >
> > >http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz
> > >2
> >
> > Wow!  Is this ever freaking fast!
> > Try it folks.  Once you do, you'll never go back to the slow way!
>
> Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> needing big kernel patch.

Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently broken  
in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).

Regards,

Nigel

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

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Pavel Machek]

On St 29-03-06 20:50:27, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> On Wednesday 29 March 2006 19:19, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Út 28-03-06 18:51:51, Mark Lord wrote:
> > > Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > >Hi everyone.
> > > >
> > > >Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> > > >
> > > >http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz
> > > >2
> > >
> > > Wow!  Is this ever freaking fast!
> > > Try it folks.  Once you do, you'll never go back to the slow way!
> >
> > Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> > needing big kernel patch.
> 
> Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently broken  
> in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).

It seems to work at least for some users. I do not have x86-64 machine
easily available, so someone else will have to fix that one.

(Also it should be possible to compile suspend without s2ram support,
avoiding the problem).
								Pavel
-- 
Picture of sleeping (Linux) penguin wanted...

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

Hi,

On Wednesday 29 March 2006 12:50, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 March 2006 19:19, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Út 28-03-06 18:51:51, Mark Lord wrote:
> > > Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > >Hi everyone.
> > > >
> > > >Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> > > >
> > > >http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.tar.bz
> > > >2
> > >
> > > Wow!  Is this ever freaking fast!
> > > Try it folks.  Once you do, you'll never go back to the slow way!
> >
> > Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> > needing big kernel patch.
> 
> Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently broken  
> in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).

You need to specify ARCH=x86_64 in the Makefile.

Unfortunately this has not been documented (yet).

Greetings,
Rafael

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Arkadiusz Miskiewicz]

On Thursday 30 March 2006 11:26, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On St 29-03-06 20:50:27, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.

> > > Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> > > needing big kernel patch.
> >
> > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently
> > broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
>
> It seems to work at least for some users. I do not have x86-64 machine
> easily available, so someone else will have to fix that one.

It builds fine here on x86_64 with gcc 4.1.

> 								Pavel

-- 
Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz        PLD/Linux Team
arekm / maven.pl            http://ftp.pld-linux.org/

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2578 bytes --]

On Thursday 30 March 2006 19:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday 29 March 2006 12:50, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently
> > broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).

I get:

nigel@nigel_c_laptop:/usr/src/uswsusp/suspend$ make suspend
cc -Wall -O2 -c vbetool/lrmi.c -o vbetool/lrmi.o
vbetool/lrmi.c:83: error: field ‘vm’ has incomplete type
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘get_int_seg’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:111: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘get_int_off’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:118: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘LRMI_init’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:147: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size
vbetool/lrmi.c:155: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size
vbetool/lrmi.c:156: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘set_regs’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:191: error: ‘IF_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function)
vbetool/lrmi.c:191: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
vbetool/lrmi.c:191: error: for each function it appears in.)
vbetool/lrmi.c:191: error: ‘IOPL_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function)
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘em_inbl’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:337: error: invalid lvalue in asm output 0
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘em_inb’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:345: error: invalid lvalue in asm output 0
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘em_inw’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:353: error: invalid lvalue in asm output 0
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘em_inl’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:361: error: invalid lvalue in asm output 0
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘run_vm86’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:594: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘VM86_TYPE’
vbetool/lrmi.c:594: error: ‘VM86_INTx’ undeclared (first use in this function)
vbetool/lrmi.c:595: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘VM86_ARG’
vbetool/lrmi.c:613: error: ‘VIF_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function)
vbetool/lrmi.c:613: error: ‘TF_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function)
vbetool/lrmi.c:618: error: ‘VM86_UNKNOWN’ undeclared (first use in this 
function)
vbetool/lrmi.c: In function ‘LRMI_int’:
vbetool/lrmi.c:840: error: ‘IF_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function)
vbetool/lrmi.c:840: error: ‘IOPL_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function)
make: *** [vbetool/lrmi.o] Error 1
nigel@nigel_c_laptop:/usr/src/uswsusp/suspend$ 

Regards,

Nigel

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

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1201 bytes --]

On Thursday 30 March 2006 19:26, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On St 29-03-06 20:50:27, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Wednesday 29 March 2006 19:19, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Út 28-03-06 18:51:51, Mark Lord wrote:
> > > > Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > >Hi everyone.
> > > > >
> > > > >Suspend2, version 2.2.2 is now available from
> > > > >
> > > > >http://stage.suspend2.net/downloads/all/suspend2-2.2.2-for-2.6.16.ta
> > > > >r.bz 2
> > > >
> > > > Wow!  Is this ever freaking fast!
> > > > Try it folks.  Once you do, you'll never go back to the slow way!
> > >
> > > Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> > > needing big kernel patch.
> >
> > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently
> > broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
>
> It seems to work at least for some users. I do not have x86-64 machine
> easily available, so someone else will have to fix that one.
>
> (Also it should be possible to compile suspend without s2ram support,
> avoiding the problem).
> 								Pavel

I just found the line saying pciutils-devel is needed. Maybe that will make 
the difference.

Regards,

Nigel

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

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> > > > needing big kernel patch.
> > >
> > > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently
> > > broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
> >
> > It seems to work at least for some users. I do not have x86-64 machine
> > easily available, so someone else will have to fix that one.
> >
> > (Also it should be possible to compile suspend without s2ram support,
> > avoiding the problem).
> 
> I just found the line saying pciutils-devel is needed. Maybe that will make 
> the difference.

I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
try adding 

ARCH=x86_64

to Makefile?
								Pavel
-- 
Picture of sleeping (Linux) penguin wanted...

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Matthew Garrett]

Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@cyclades.com> wrote:

> make: *** [vbetool/lrmi.o] Error 1

LRMI will never compile on x86_64 - the kernel doesn't do vm86. It 
should be using the x86emu backend.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.linux-rutgers.kernel@srcf.ucam.org

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1039 bytes --]

Hi.

On Thursday 30 March 2006 21:55, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > Please do try code at suspend.sf.net. It should be as fast and not
> > > > > needing big kernel patch.
> > > >
> > > > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is
> > > > currently broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
> > >
> > > It seems to work at least for some users. I do not have x86-64 machine
> > > easily available, so someone else will have to fix that one.
> > >
> > > (Also it should be possible to compile suspend without s2ram support,
> > > avoiding the problem).
> >
> > I just found the line saying pciutils-devel is needed. Maybe that will
> > make the difference.
>
> I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
> try adding
>
> ARCH=x86_64
>
> to Makefile?

Heh. It worked. Maybe you should have something to figure out what arch the 
user is using :) It seems a bit strange to tell the compiler that I'm using 
the arch it ought to know I'm using.

Regards,

Nigel

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

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
> > try adding
> >
> > ARCH=x86_64
> >
> > to Makefile?
> 
> Heh. It worked. Maybe you should have something to figure out what arch the 
> user is using :) It seems a bit strange to tell the compiler that I'm using 
> the arch it ought to know I'm using.

Good. Does 

ARCH=`uname -m`

work, too? If so, I'll commit it... when sf.net gets up.
									Pavel

-- 
Picture of sleeping (Linux) penguin wanted...

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 406 bytes --]

Hi,

On Thursday 30 March 2006 11:39, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 19:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wednesday 29 March 2006 12:50, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is currently
> > > broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
> 
> I get:

Please try the Makefile that I use on x86_64 (attached).

Greetings,
Rafael

[-- Attachment #2: Makefile --]
[-- Type: text/x-makefile, Size: 3152 bytes --]

CONFIG_COMPRESS=yes
CONFIG_ENCRYPT=yes
ARCH=x86_64

CC_FLAGS=-I/usr/local/include
LD_FLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib

ifdef CONFIG_COMPRESS
CC_FLAGS	+= -DCONFIG_COMPRESS
LD_FLAGS	+= -llzf
endif
ifdef CONFIG_ENCRYPT
CC_FLAGS	+= -DCONFIG_ENCRYPT
LD_FLAGS	+= -lcrypto
endif

SUSPEND_DIR=/usr/local/sbin
CONFIG_DIR=/etc
RESUME_DEVICE=<path_to_resume_device_file>
BOOT_DIR=/boot

ifdef CONFIG_ENCRYPT
all: suspend suspend-keygen resume s2ram
else
all: suspend resume s2ram
endif

S2RAMOBJ=vt.o vbetool/lrmi.o vbetool/x86-common.o vbetool/vbetool.o radeontool.o dmidecode.o

ifeq ($(ARCH), x86_64)
S2RAMOBJ=vt.o vbetool/thunk.o vbetool/x86-common.o vbetool/vbetool.o vbetool/x86emu/libx86emu.a radeontool.o dmidecode.o
endif

clean:
	rm -f suspend suspend-keygen suspend.keys resume s2ram *.o vbetool/*.o vbetool/x86emu/*.o vbetool/x86emu/*.a

s2ram:	s2ram.c dmidecode.c whitelist.c radeontool.c $(S2RAMOBJ)
	$(CC) -g -Wall -O2 s2ram.c $(S2RAMOBJ) -lpci -o s2ram

vbetool/vbetool.o:	vbetool/vbetool.c
	$(CC) -Wall -O2 -DS2RAM -c vbetool/vbetool.c -o vbetool/vbetool.o

vbetool/lrmi.o:	vbetool/lrmi.c
	$(CC) -Wall -O2 -c vbetool/lrmi.c -o vbetool/lrmi.o

vbetool/x86-common.o:	vbetool/x86-common.c
	$(CC) -Wall -O2 -c vbetool/x86-common.c -o vbetool/x86-common.o

vbetool/x86emu/libx86emu.a:
	make -C vbetool/x86emu -f makefile.linux

vbetool/thunk.o:	vbetool/thunk.c
	$(CC) -Wall -O2 -c vbetool/thunk.c -o vbetool/thunk.o

dmidecode.o:	dmidecode.c
	$(CC) -Wall -O2 -DS2RAM -c dmidecode.c -o dmidecode.o

radeontool.o:	radeontool.c
	$(CC) -Wall -O2 -DS2RAM -c radeontool.c -o radeontool.o

md5.o:	md5.c md5.h
	$(CC) -Wall -o md5.o -DHAVE_INTTYPES_H -DHAVE_STDINT_H -c md5.c

encrypt.o:	encrypt.c encrypt.h md5.h
	$(CC) -Wall -DHAVE_INTTYPES_H -DHAVE_STDINT_H $(CC_FLAGS) -c encrypt.c

config.o:	config.c config.h
	$(CC) -Wall $(CC_FLAGS) -c config.c

vt.o:	vt.c vt.h
	$(CC) -Wall -c vt.c

suspend:	md5.o encrypt.o config.o suspend.c swsusp.h config.h encrypt.h md5.h s2ram.c dmidecode.c whitelist.c radeontool.c $(S2RAMOBJ)
	$(CC) -g -O2 -DCONFIG_BOTH -Wall $(CC_FLAGS) md5.o encrypt.o config.o suspend.c s2ram.c -o suspend $(S2RAMOBJ) $(LD_FLAGS) -lpci

resume:	md5.o encrypt.o config.o resume.c swsusp.h config.h encrypt.h md5.h
	$(CC) -Wall $(CC_FLAGS) md5.o encrypt.o config.o resume.c -static -o resume $(LD_FLAGS)

ifdef CONFIG_ENCRYPT
suspend-keygen:	md5.o encrypt.o keygen.c encrypt.h md5.h
	$(CC) -Wall -DHAVE_INTTYPES_H -DHAVE_STDINT_H -DCONFIG_ENCRYPT md5.o keygen.c -o suspend-keygen -lcrypto

install-suspend:	suspend suspend-keygen conf/suspend.conf
	if [ ! -c /dev/snapshot ]; then mknod /dev/snapshot c 10 231; fi
	install --mode=755 suspend-keygen $(SUSPEND_DIR)
	install --mode=755 suspend $(SUSPEND_DIR)
	install --mode=644 conf/suspend.conf $(CONFIG_DIR)
else
install-suspend:	suspend conf/suspend.conf
	if [ ! -c /dev/snapshot ]; then mknod /dev/snapshot c 10 231; fi
	install --mode=755 suspend $(SUSPEND_DIR)
	install --mode=644 conf/suspend.conf $(CONFIG_DIR)
endif

install-resume-initrd:	resume conf/suspend.conf
	BOOT_DIR=$(BOOT_DIR) ./scripts/create-resume-initrd.sh $(RESUME_DEVICE)

install-resume:		resume 
	./scripts/install-resume.sh

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

Hi,

On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
> > > try adding
> > >
> > > ARCH=x86_64
> > >
> > > to Makefile?
> > 
> > Heh. It worked. Maybe you should have something to figure out what arch the 
> > user is using :) It seems a bit strange to tell the compiler that I'm using 
> > the arch it ought to know I'm using.
> 
> Good. Does 
> 
> ARCH=`uname -m`
> 
> work, too?

No, it doesn't.

Rafael

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
> > > > try adding
> > > >
> > > > ARCH=x86_64
> > > >
> > > > to Makefile?
> > > 
> > > Heh. It worked. Maybe you should have something to figure out what arch the 
> > > user is using :) It seems a bit strange to tell the compiler that I'm using 
> > > the arch it ought to know I'm using.
> > 
> > Good. Does 
> > 
> > ARCH=`uname -m`
> > 
> > work, too?
> 
> No, it doesn't.

Something like this works, though:

ARCH:=$(shell uname -m)

Rafael

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Pavel Machek]

On Čt 30-03-06 14:24:50, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
> > > > > try adding
> > > > >
> > > > > ARCH=x86_64
> > > > >
> > > > > to Makefile?
> > > > 
> > > > Heh. It worked. Maybe you should have something to figure out what arch the 
> > > > user is using :) It seems a bit strange to tell the compiler that I'm using 
> > > > the arch it ought to know I'm using.
> > > 
> > > Good. Does 
> > > 
> > > ARCH=`uname -m`
> > > 
> > > work, too?
> > 
> > No, it doesn't.
> 
> Something like this works, though:
> 
> ARCH:=$(shell uname -m)

looks good, can you commit it (when sf works again :-).
							Pavel
-- 
Picture of sleeping (Linux) penguin wanted...

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:59, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Čt 30-03-06 14:24:50, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thursday 30 March 2006 14:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > I do not see missing includes, so I'm not sure it will help. Can you
> > > > > > try adding
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ARCH=x86_64
> > > > > >
> > > > > > to Makefile?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Heh. It worked. Maybe you should have something to figure out what arch the 
> > > > > user is using :) It seems a bit strange to tell the compiler that I'm using 
> > > > > the arch it ought to know I'm using.
> > > > 
> > > > Good. Does 
> > > > 
> > > > ARCH=`uname -m`
> > > > 
> > > > work, too?
> > > 
> > > No, it doesn't.
> > 
> > Something like this works, though:
> > 
> > ARCH:=$(shell uname -m)
> 
> looks good, can you commit it (when sf works again :-).

Yup, I will.

Rafael

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 607 bytes --]

Hi.

On Thursday 30 March 2006 22:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 11:39, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 March 2006 19:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 29 March 2006 12:50, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is
> > > > currently broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
> >
> > I get:
>
> Please try the Makefile that I use on x86_64 (attached).

Am I right in guessing that I don't need to anymore, given the other emails on 
this thread?

Regards,

Nigel

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

Re: Suspend2-2.2.2 for 2.6.16.

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday 31 March 2006 01:14, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> On Thursday 30 March 2006 22:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 March 2006 11:39, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > On Thursday 30 March 2006 19:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 29 March 2006 12:50, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > > Don't bother suggesting that to x86_64 owners: compilation is
> > > > > currently broken in vbetool/lrmi.c (at least).
> > >
> > > I get:
> >
> > Please try the Makefile that I use on x86_64 (attached).
> 
> Am I right in guessing that I don't need to anymore, given the other emails on 
> this thread?

Yes, you are. :-)

Greetings,
Rafael