I've just released version 1.0 of vbetool. The only real difference
between this and older versions is that I've moved over to using libx86
rather than carrying around an extra copy of lrmi and x86emu. In the
process I've fixed a pile of bugs in the x86emu code, so it should work
much better on
Hello,
I just got my laptop to resume correctly with s2ram. Here is the output of
s2ram -i:
sys_vendor = "ASUSTeK Computer Inc."
sys_product = "Z35FM "
sys_version = "1.0 "
bios_version = "302 "
In order to resume correctly both in console
On Friday, 2 March 2007 15:29, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 03:00:59PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > > For example, if the docs say "please have a look into whitelist.txt
> > > > > to see
> > > > > what s2ram options are known to work with your machine" etc.,
On Friday, 2 March 2007 18:49, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 05:34:54PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > I'm not saying HAL people should keep their whitelist. We should do it
> > exactly once, do it in s2ram, and do it right.
>
> They already do not use s2ram because "it is a
On 3/2/07, Stefan Seyfried <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 05:34:54PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > That whitelist should have been in kernel; we can't do that, but it
> > still makes sense to keep it at low level.
>
> Then go ahead and push that to them.
> You also need to be
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 05:34:54PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> I'm not saying HAL people should keep their whitelist. We should do it
> exactly once, do it in s2ram, and do it right.
They already do not use s2ram because "it is another dependency".
Crap, i know, but that's reality.
> That whit
On 3/2/07, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Baseline is: i won't implement PCI id matching. pm-utils already use
> > >
> > > That's okay, but don't stop others from doing that.
> >
> > I never tried that. I just want to point out that it would be a huge
> > wast of resources (and a s
Hi!
> > > Baseline is: i won't implement PCI id matching. pm-utils already use
> >
> > That's okay, but don't stop others from doing that.
>
> I never tried that. I just want to point out that it would be a huge
> wast of resources (and a source of confusion) to further promote two
> different w
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 04:59:23PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Just use "powersave -u" or "pm-suspend".
> > Sorry, your usecase is not the one demanded by 99% of our audience.
>
> Yep, unfortunately my usecase is pretty much required for
> debugging. ("Boot with init=/bin/bash, s2ram")
Hi!
> > > > > > If PCI IDs/subids are good at telling machines apart, lets use that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok. HAL can already match them easily :-)
> > > >
> > > > I'd really prefer not to use HAL.
> > >
> > > You don't have to. You can still use "sram -f -foo -whatever". There is
> > > even th
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 03:41:53PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > If PCI IDs/subids are good at telling machines apart, lets use that.
> > > >
> > > > Ok. HAL can already match them easily :-)
> > >
> > > I'd really prefer not to use HAL.
> >
> > You don't have to. You can still
Hi!
> > > > If PCI IDs/subids are good at telling machines apart, lets use that.
> > >
> > > Ok. HAL can already match them easily :-)
> >
> > I'd really prefer not to use HAL.
>
> You don't have to. You can still use "sram -f -foo -whatever". There is
> even the "alias" command in most shells
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 03:01:52PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2007-02-28 00:06:13, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 11:30:23PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > I do not think we want to go into that trap. We do not want "any
> > > arbitrary matcher". That's no better
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 03:00:59PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > For example, if the docs say "please have a look into whitelist.txt to
> > > > see
> > > > what s2ram options are known to work with your machine" etc., we'll be
> > > > able
> > > > to maintain the whitelist as a sepa
On Wed 2007-02-28 00:06:13, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 11:30:23PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > I do not think we want to go into that trap. We do not want "any
> > arbitrary matcher". That's no better than matching in C code.
> >
> > If PCI IDs/subids are good at telling
Hi!
> > > For example, if the docs say "please have a look into whitelist.txt to see
> > > what s2ram options are known to work with your machine" etc., we'll be
> > > able
> > > to maintain the whitelist as a separate document, IMHO, and the HAL or
> > > pm-tools
> > > people can use some more
Hi!
> > Now.. how do we fix this? Whitelist on both bios version and
> > northbridge/videocard PCI IDs?
>
> If we go that way, the DMI stuff may become irrelevant, since the subvendor
> ids are basically as accurate as the DMI entries anyway. For example:
>
> 00:02.0 Class 0300: 8086:3582 (rev 0
17 matches
Mail list logo
