On Fri, 27 Dec 2013, Joerg Dorchain escribió: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 09:27:18PM +0100, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: > [...] > > If the variable resume was set, with the noresume option as kernel > > parameter, > > is unset. > > I think I understand the resulting semantics of the scripts. My > point is more but I preferred the old behaviour, and changing > user visible behaviour without a mentioning it somewhere > prominently is what I would call a regression. > > Esp. since if you boot without resuming once, you have no chance > to resume to the old state again, since the swap device is > overwritten, which can be quite unpleasant. > > Bye, > > Joerg
Hi Joerg, I don't understand when you say "old behaviour". I was working in uswsusp but I didn't change the behaviour. I added some things, like UUID support,... but with the same behaviour. I was checking previous uswsusp versions, and I didn't see big differences with the old code. I am not sure if the problem is with uswsusp or with other Debian packages (initramfs-tools?). Could you help me to discover when the behaviour changed? Old uswsusp package versions are here: http://snapshot.debian.org/package/uswsusp/ You can download the old binary packages. I started to work in uswsusp in version 1.0-1, so testing versions 0.8-1.2, 1.0-1 could help. Thanks for your help. kix. -- .''`. Rodolfo García Peñas (kix) <k...@debian.org> : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 3F48 0B8C C385 AD41 9E28 006A 7B1F 5490 72B7 4923 `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
