Suspend2 isn't invasive.

[Scott Robinson]

Might I interject here and point at a document I have started preparing:

  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeistySuspendOverview

If we want to improve the suspend process, there are far better places
to start than adding suspend2 patches. Nigel, am I mistaken in asserting
that the kernel patches do not fundamentally change the sleep/hibernate
itself.. but rather add a richer capabilities like encryption and
compression?

Adding some sanity to our current infrastructure would be a start.
Harmonizing policy and reducing differences from upstream.

Comprehensive analysis of the acpi-support vs. suspend's hibernate
script actions would also be a great effort. It could potentially
improve both scripts. (I have started on this and would be happy to
share some of my work.)

(Me, I dream of a sleep -> hibernate automatic timeout.)

What I'm saying is, there is a lot of work that could be done on the
current infrastructure. And if interested people can make some progress
there, then I'm sure arguments for including suspend2 patches would
likely be considered a bit more...

-- 
Scott Robinson <scott at quadhome.com>
http://quadhome.com/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 199 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20061129/ac230c01/attachment-0001.pgp