Hi. On Tuesday 07 February 2006 04:48, Lee Revell wrote: > On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 15:43 +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Monday 06 February 2006 14:34, Lee Revell wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 14:02 +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > (they now have to download extra > > > > libraries to use the splashscreen, which were not required with > > > > the bootsplash patch, and need to check whether an update to the > > > > userui code > > > > is required when updating the kernel) > > > > > > You could have avoided this problem by keeping the > > > userspace<->kernel interface stable. > > > > True, but sometimes you need to make changes that do modify the > > interface. If the interface involves more functionality, this will > > happen more frequently. > > Well, all I can say is, it should have been obvious that putting a > themeable UI in the kernel would not fly. Agreed, but I think we have some confusion here. I was talking about interactions between kernel space and userspace after we started using the userspace interface. In particular, I was thinking of the fact that the netlink message number kept changing due to changes in the vanilla kernel. In the end, we just made it a command line option to the userui. My point for this conversation was different, though. If uswsusp ever does fly, there are going to be flag days where users are going to have to download new userspace code, perhaps new versions of libraries or new libraries, run the compilation and reconfigure their initrds/ram-fses, all just because they upgraded their kernel and want to continue to suspend to disk. That is extra complexity introduced by using a userspace 'brain' instead of having it in kernelspace. Regards, Nigel -- See our web page for Howtos, FAQs, the Wiki and mailing list info. http://www.suspend2.net IRC: #suspend2 on Freenode
Attachment:
pgpuZt7VTVmny.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- References:
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation
- Next by Date: [PATCH] Fix compiler warning in driver core for CONFIG_HOTPLUG=N
- Previous by thread: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Next by thread: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Index(es):