severity 488144 wishlist tags 488144 wontfix thanks Jon Dowland wrote:
Package: pm-utils Version: 1.1.2.3-1 Severity: normalHello, With the move to 2.6.26, suspend stopped working for me. This turned out to be a bug in s2ram, rather than pm-utils, but this took me a lot longer to figure out due to the "auto" mode implemented in 10-sleep-module-auto-detection.patch. I think it would be a good idea to drop this: I think pm-utils may handle suspend better than s2ram these days, and more and more quirk-handling is being moved into the kernel. Having the behaviour of pm-utils change depending on whether uswsusp is installed or not makes behaviour very unpredictable and bugs harder to triage. Also, it's quite a significant behavioural change from what people may expect if they are familiar with pm-utils upstream (or in another distro). At the very least, if you insist on keeping the patch, submit it upstream for inclusion or for their opinion (I suspect they would disagree with it's inclusion).
Remember, that I'm also part of the upstream team of pm-utils ;-)The simple reason, why I didn't commit the patch upstream is, that the way it is implemented is a bit "hackish".
Along similar lines, I think you should move s2ram from Recommends: to Suggests:. with s2ram present, pm-utils is little more than a quirk-handling wrapper around a program that implements quirk-handling all by itself, and most people installing pm-utils are going to end up with pm-utils as long as you Recommend it. I think the future of suspend on most Linux desktops is going to be one with out uswsusp and one with all the quirk handling in the kernel.
You have to make a distinction between s2ram (suspend-to-ram) and s2disk (suspend-to-disk) here. While it maybe true, that s2ram will become simpler (e.g. the whitelist is supposed to be moved out of s2ram), it is basically an advanced vbetools. On the other hand, there is s2disk. I believe s2disk is clearly the way forward (as it allows for things like encryption, compression, integration into splash systems, like splashy or usplash). Also, upstream of the (u)swsusp code in the kernel is a strong proponent of uswsusp.
Short answer is, that I won't change the current behaviour.If someone installs uswusp, it can be safely expected, that uswsusp should be used, that's why this patch was added (it's the same assumption as in Debian system services, like apache, are automatically activated and started on boot upon installation)
The simplest way actually to not use uswsusp, is to uninstall it. May I ask, why you have uswsusp installed if you don't want to use it? Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
