Suspend2 (Dagobah's packages)

[Hervé Fache]

On 7/26/06, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> Absolutely. I have no veto power. If someone can make a sufficiently
> convincing technical argument for using suspend2, then the tech board
> (and, frankly, me) are likely to have no objection. But it would have to
> contain new arguments. It's not as if suspend2 has never been considered
> before, or that we've rejected its technical merits out of hand.

Well, I respect every opinion on this list, and veto power is not what
I consider here. But if you are the maintainer, then indeed your voice
is more important than mine! May I suggest looking into suspend2 again
though?

> [suspend] works on every machine I have here. Let me say this again - there is
> no technical reason for the in-kernel swsusp to fail on machines where
> suspend2 works. The hibernate script generally used with suspend2 does
> things differently to our suspend scripts, and in some cases that may
> make the difference between success and failure. In some cases, the
> opposite may be true. That's something that can be fixed, but it's not
> going to be fixed while people repeatedly claim that it's suspend2 that
> makes the difference. If you're willing to help work on this bug, then
> I'm more than happy to as well.

Well, if there is none, then I want to understand why it NEVER worked
on any of the machines I have tried, whereas suspend2 worked on ALL of
them, and with a beautiful progress bar. I suppose you do too, so I
suggest trying out suspend2 on a test machine you have, and look for
yourself. I recommend Dagobah's offering.

May I also suggest documenting the reasons for rejecting suspend2 (or
pointing us to the right place), so we can stop moaning and ranting,
till the next time ;)

Hervé.