On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 17:17 -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On 2/21/06, Lee Revell <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 18:05 +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > > > Pavel, if you mean that the userspace code will not be reviewed to > > > standards the kernel code is, kill uswsusp _NOW_ before it does too > > > much damage. Unreliable suspend eats filesystems for breakfast. The > > > other userspace components of the kernels services are either optional > > > (udev) or not that important (alsa). > > > > > > > Why is sound less important than suspending, or networking, or any other > > subsystem? This is an insult to everyone who worked long and hard to > > get decent sound support on Linux. > > > > I bet this was not meant as an insult. Quote: "Unreliable suspend eats > filesystems for breakfast". The worst thing mismatched ALSA library > could cause is noice in my speakers. OK fair enough, I took that out of context. Lee - 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/
- 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]>
- suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- From: Olivier Galibert <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- From: "Dmitry Torokhov" <[email protected]>
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- Prev by Date: Re: make -j with j <= 4 seems to only load a single CPU core
- Next by Date: Re: hald in status D with 2.6.16-rc4
- Previous by thread: Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- Next by thread: Re: suspend2 review [was Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)]
- Index(es):
 |