On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:44:26PM -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > On 11/30/06 04:58:18PM +0100, maximilian attems wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 04:13:39PM +0100, Andre Massing wrote: > > > maximilian attems wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 10:16:50PM +0100, Andre Massing wrote: > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> will be there any chance to include anything like a > > > >> linux-patch-suspend2 for > > > >> the shipped kernel? This is one of the patches I am really missing. > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Andre > > > > > > > > no it is not accepted upstream, push nigel to submit upstream. > > > > > > > What does this exactly mean? Must Nigel submit it to upstream? AFAIK (at > > > > yes, debian does not include third party patches > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines > > Xen und Vserver are evident "enterprise ready" exceptions ;) > > > > No offense to anyone involved but I've had a lot more success using the > suspend2 patches on my notebook than I've had getting Xen to work. I can > understand the desire to maintain as few external patches as necessary, > especially considering that Nigel will likely keep his patches updated > against the current kernel.org release while Etch will have 2.6.18 forever, > but the in kernel swsusp sucks and IMO uswsusp isn't quite there yet so if > Etch is to officially support suspend to RAM and/or disk then suspend2 > should definitely be reconsidered. If suspension isn't something that > matters for the Etch release then I guess it doesn't matter which method is > included. > > Jim.
hey guys, you wasted already _more_ time than it needs to add a stupid kernel patch suspend2 package. so stop whining and get to work -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
