Hi.
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 22:04, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> Do you implement the entire swsusp userspace interface? If not, removing
> >> it probably isn't a reasonable plan without fair warning.
> >
> > I'm not suggesting removing the sysfs interface or replacing system to
> > ram - just the suspend to disk part.
>
> Right, so you support the resume from disk trigger in sysfs and the
> /proc/acpi/sleep interface? If suspend2 is a complete dropin replacement
> then I'm much happier with the idea of dropping swsusp, but I don't want
> to have to tie suspend/resume scripts to kernel versions.
Suspend2 currently has a proc entry to do the same, but I can easily
hook into the sysfs code. /proc/acpi/sleep is already taken care of, as
is the reboot handler. Suspend2 currently uses resume2= so as to not
conflict with swsusp, but that can be changed too. I always to my utmost
to ease the pain for other users. If something doesn't work the way you
want, just tell me and (assuming it's reasonable), I'll fix it.
Regards,
Nigel
--
Evolution.
Enumerate the requirements.
Consider the interdependencies.
Calculate the probabilities.
Be amazed that people believe it happened.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |