Messages in this thread | | | From | Michael Frank <> | Subject | Re: swsusp: revert to 2.6.0-test3 state | Date | Fri, 5 Sep 2003 09:09:20 +0800 |
| |
On Friday 05 September 2003 03:31, Pavel Machek wrote: > It puts you in a better position, AFAICS. When code is rewritten > anyway, "don't fix it if it aint broken" is not so important any > more -- good for you. > > I still hope to avoid two software suspends in 2.6.X. > Bah, there may be three implementations now.
On Tuesday 02 September 2003 06:55, Patrick Mochel wrote: > > In all actuality, I don't need swsusp. I have a better suspend-to-disk > implementation that is faster, smaller, and cleaner. I've hesitated > merging it because I thought swsusp improvements would be more welcome. > Obviously they're not; or you haven't actually taken the time to read the > code. >
This looks like a democratic (darwinistic) approach which will help to get the best solution for 2.6.
Regards Michael
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |