Because of the fact that hibernate (if it fails) can destroy someones work, I don't feel that the decision to remove hibernate is a bad idea at all.
If there were time to make it work without a doubt, knowing that people won't lose their work, then maybe at a future time it would be plausible to bring back the discussion to see if it would be used more. Just my .02 ~Brian On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Otto Kekäläinen <o...@sange.fi> wrote: > I'm in favor of removing hibernate for the reasons Rick expressed. > > ma, 2011-01-31 kello 11:04 -0800, Rick Spencer kirjoitti: >> However, Hibernate works well for some users, so this will be a >> painful >> regression[1]. > > Hibernate works well on my computer, however the speed of starting from > zero, loading grub, loading kernel, loading saved memory state and > showing the desktop etc (the hibernate does) is almost the exactly same > as doing a normal startup, so the hibernate mode is quite useless. > > The work done on upstart and other boot time improvements has made > hibernate obsolete. Thanks! > > -- > | Otto Kekäläinen > | http://www.sange.fi/ > > > -- > ubuntu-desktop mailing list > ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop > -- Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. --Wernher Von Braun "The second law of thermodynamics: If you think things are in a mess now, JUST WAIT!!" ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Statement Below is True The Statement Above is False ---------------------------------------------------------------- -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
