Comment 7 for bug 134238
Revision history for this message
| Roman Kreisel (roman-kreisel+launchpad) wrote | #7 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
7020100
(Get the code!)
I must agree with the others: re-enable the build of s2ram. First of all, there is no reason NOT to build it. If the only reason is "You don't need s2ram, there are other ways to do it", why do you offer uswsusp at all? There are also other ways to hibernate the system.
The next thing is, that if you remove s2ram, do it correctly:
- Remove the s2ram-part from the package description
- Remove the s2ram-part from the README.Debian
- Implement the "-n"-funcionality from s2ram into s2both, so that users can verifiy if their machine is s2both (and s2ram)-ready
Regards
Roman