On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:59:06AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Now I haven't followed the suspend2 vs swsusp debate very closely, but
> it seems to me that your biggest problem with getting this merged is
> getting consensus on where exactly this is going. Nobody wants two
> different suspend modules in the kernel. So there are two options -
> suspend2 is deemed the way to go, and it gets merged and replaces
> swsusp. Or the other way around - people like swsusp more, and you are
> doomed to maintain suspend2 outside the tree.
Actually, there's a third option that is looking like the way forward,
doing all of this from userspace and having no suspend-to-disk in the
kernel tree at all.
Pavel and others have a working implementation and are slowly moving
toward adding all of the "bright and shiny" features that is in suspend2
to it (encryption, progress screens, abort by pressing a key, etc.) so
that there is no loss of functionality.
So I don't really see the future of suspend2 because of this...
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
