On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 06:11:24PM -0000, hyperair wrote: > That would be a bad idea. If we want uswsusp to work with pm-utils by default > (if uswsusp is > installed) then no changes need to be done. But what James Westby and the > rest of them want to do is > allow uswsusp to be installed, and pm-utils doesn't use it unless you > explicitly install AND enable > it. Well this effect could be achieved better through the use of debconf, but > honestly, too many > prompts by debconf isn't pretty, and should be kept to a minimum.
People use uswsusp either because 1) It's legacy on a box that was upgraded from hardy to intrepid where uswsusp was installed for whatever reason. (How I encountered this). 2) They followed feisty or gutsy vintage instructions. 3) Their hardware does not work properly with the kernel sleep and hibernate modules for pm-utils. #1 and #2 could probably withstand applying the rolled up newspaper treatment to the user. #3 indicates attempting to conceal a defect in the pm-utils package and MAYBE it's worthwhile to report the defect in pm-utils. Right now the crux of the pm-utils defect is that it assumes that the module for hibernate should also be the module for sleep. On debian this makes sense as uswsusp provides both hibernate and sleep. This is a side effect of the revision of the pm-utils code to be more modular. Upstream should be notified of the problem in logic prior to distributing a fix for intrepid. (I apologize for switching between sleep and suspend... I'm trying to maintain the same inconsistancy as the pm-utils modules). > > And also, I agree that if we don't have s2ram even built in the uswsusp > package, then we should at > least have a separate package with just s2ram in it. Assuming s2ram is the right solution. At this point in the game, intrepid is alpha. The prescribed configuration is pm-utils without uswsusp. If pm-utils fails on suspend or hibernate with uswsusp on your hardware, the ubuntu developers need to know. If you installed uswsusp to resolve a hibernate problem and uswsusp did, maybe the fix is to change the logic in pm-utils instead of bringing back s2ram. If the logic on pm-utils is improved to separate the configured module for sleep from module for hibernate, the long term solution might be for pm-utils to provide suspend and hibernate blacklists, uswsusp to provide suspend and hibernate blacklists, and tuxonice to provide suspend and hibernate blacklists and for pm-is-supported to provide a --verbose or --recommends flag that indicates which module is being used for suspend, hibernate, or suspend-hybrid, whether it was hard set or determined from absence from blacklists, and if it's blacklisted the next priority package. -- Chris Dukes "In cynicism she's about 35" -- Terry Pratchett's "Hog Father" -- suspend button disappears after pm-utils upgraded to 1.1.2.4-1ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/267141 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs