Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Feb 2006 11:20:52 +0100 | From | Matthias Hensler <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) |
| |
Hi.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:11:09AM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 10:39 +0100, Matthias Hensler wrote: > > These "big changes" is something I have a problem with, since it > > means to delay a working suspend/resume in Linux for another > > "short-term" (so what does it mean: 1 month? six? twelve?). > > If you have a big problem with this then ask the developer why he > didn't submit it 1 or 6 or 12 months sooner, don't complain to the > kernel developers.
Well, that is up to Nigel, but he did spend a lot of time to make Suspend 2 clean and acceptable for the mainline first.
I do not complain that the patch is not inserted as it is. I too see the problems and open issues. But that is nothing that cannot be solved.
What I complain is to start from the scratch with something which is not necessarily better and takes a lot of time. I think uswsusp in the current form just has too many drawbacks.
Regards, Matthias - 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/
| |