Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)

[Matthias Hensler <matthias@wspse.de>]

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/