Comment 3 for bug 287374
Revision history for this message
| Chow Loong Jin (hyperair) wrote Re: [Bug 287374] Re: [Intrepid] Suspend fails when telling pm-utils to use uswsusp | #3 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 09:12 +0000, James Westby wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think your patch is a sensible one. If we know s2ram isn't going
> to be available we shouldn't bother checking for it.
>
> I haven't reviewed the patch in detail yet, but I think it may be a
> little too late for the release. I do however think it makes a reasonable
> candidate for an SRU.
>
> I'm subscribing the sponsors for main so that someone appropriate can
> review the change.
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
>
> It does break it for those that have recompiled uswsusp to have
> an s2ram binary, but they will be an even smaller minority.
>
>
> ** Changed in: pm-utils (Ubuntu)
> Importance: Undecided => Low
> Status: New => Confirmed
>
While we know that s2ram isn't going to be available by default, I think
we shouldn't break it for those who do have s2ram, or it would be a
regression for them. As of now this patch doesn't carry any negative
effects to either party, i.e. it uses s2ram if present, and uses kernel
if s2ram isn't.
--
Chow Loong Jin