Re: swsusp / suspend2 reliability

[Pavel Machek]

> > So what Pavel wants can be
> > translated as 'please use already merged code, it can already do what
> > you want without further changing kernel'.
> 
> Like we'd want to use unreviewed, extremely new and risky code for
> something that happily destroy filesystems.

You can either use suspend2 (14000 lines of unreviewed kernel code,
old) or uswsusp (~500 lines of reviewed kernel code, ~2000 lines of
unreviewed userspace code, new).

Of course, you can also use swsusp (~2000 lines of reviewed kernel
code, pretty old) if stability matters to you more than graphical
progress bar.

I know what I'm picking, and I'm pretty sure I know what
mainline/distros will pick.

If you want to help, you are welcome to test/review any component. But
stop producing hot air.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/