On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:55:06AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
- pm-utils DONE
retired in master
Is that good enough? Should systemd obsolete it, too? I thought the
whole point of this thread was that pm-utils was actively dangerous
now, so shouldn't we actively remove it from
Am 16.04.2015 um 14:31 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:55:06AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
- pm-utils DONE
retired in master
Is that good enough? Should systemd obsolete it, too? I thought the
whole point of this thread was that pm-utils was actively
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:55:06AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
- pm-utils DONE
retired in master
Is that good enough? Should systemd obsolete it, too? I thought the
whole point of this thread was
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:00:52AM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
On 04/13/2015 11:34 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
OK, so swap 2x memory seems excessive. Actually swap with the same as
memory should work *most* of the time. There's no guarantee that any
amount swap will be enough,
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 09:30:31AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX.
suggested swap for
- Original Message -
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:26:14AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
- Original Message -
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 09:30:31AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 04/15/2015 09:07 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Maybe swap space should simply be max(4GB, $PhysicalMemory).
Actually, isn't 'swap to filesystem' still an option? if so, maybe
swap should be a constant 4GB, and hibernation should create an
appropriately sized file on the fly, join it
On 04/15/2015 11:02 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I think that conflating memory-to-disk swap space with I can
hibernate my machine is unacceptable. We need a new partition type
that Anaconda would setup, or a whitelist of laptops with firmwares
that support rapid start (and again, Anaconda to set
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:26:14AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
- Original Message -
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 09:30:31AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com
wrote:
- Original Message -
OK not
- Original Message -
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 09:30:31AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Jaroslav Skarvada jskar...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
On 01.04.2015 10:29, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
pm-hibernate is obsolete as others already mentioned.
Do the pm-utils maintainers/upstream know this?
Hi,
I am pm-utils
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
I think the problem is in the ways filesystems are implemented. The
fs has to be mounted to access the swap file, and this can change the
fs, even with a read-only mount.
At least on Linux I'm pretty sure
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:26:14AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
- Original Message -
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 09:30:31AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at
- Original Message -
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:39:04AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Yeah, hibernation is automatically invoked when battery runs low
Is this actually the default behaviour?
We call either HybridSleep, Hibernate or PowerOff, depending on what the
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:39:04AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Yeah, hibernation is automatically invoked when battery runs low
Is this actually the default behaviour?
--
Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
- Original Message -
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX.
suggested swap for laptop seems low
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037472
I don't see how hibernation works reliably with such a low default swap
On 04/13/2015 11:34 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
OK, so swap 2x memory seems excessive. Actually swap with the same as
memory should work *most* of the time. There's no guarantee that any
amount swap will be enough, since it could all be filled by the time
hibernation is requested, but
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX.
suggested swap for laptop seems low
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037472
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX.
suggested swap for laptop seems low
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037472
I don't see how hibernation works reliably with such a low default swap size.
Chris Murphy
--
devel mailing
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 04:39:38PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX.
suggested swap for laptop seems low
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037472
I don't see how hibernation works
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 00:39 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 04:39:38PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as WONTFIX.
suggested swap for laptop seems low
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 07:20:46PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 00:39 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 04:39:38PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
OK not everyone is on the same page, apparently. This bug was just
closed by Anaconda as
On 04/13/2015 08:34 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
The details can be worked out. But I don't understand the justification
for closing of the bug:
(In reply to David Lehman from comment #1)
Anaconda does not automatically configure systems for hibernation at this
time.
Hibernation is
- Original Message -
On 01.04.2015 10:29, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
pm-hibernate is obsolete as others already mentioned.
Do the pm-utils maintainers/upstream know this?
Hi,
I am pm-utils maintainer. I own some other legacy packages and
I am retiring them only if
Fixed in rawhide now.
Thanks,
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 10:36:50AM +0200, poma wrote:
On 01.04.2015 10:29, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
pm-hibernate is obsolete as others already mentioned.
Do the pm-utils maintainers/upstream know this?
Hi,
I am pm-utils maintainer. I own some
pm-hibernate is obsolete as others already mentioned.
Do the pm-utils maintainers/upstream know this?
Hi,
I am pm-utils maintainer. I own some other legacy packages and
I am retiring them only if there are good reasons for it
(e.g. unfixed security bugs, breakage, etc.), because there may
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 08:57:56AM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
There the problem is, that dracut runs a fsck check before deciding
whether to resume. This can result in a big file system corruption,
since the kernel had a different idea of the file system state after
resuming from hibernation
[cc maintainer]
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 04:37:57PM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 30 March 2015 at 15:42, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote:
Can/should we just obsolete / retire it?
Agreed. It probably still has some uses, but it's just too
confusing to have it around.
Zbyszek
I tried to,
On Mon, 30.03.15 08:57, Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) wrote:
Hi,
it seems to be that me have a major problem of core package maintainers
coordinating features in Fedora.
See for example:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174945
There the problem is, that dracut runs a
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 07:40:58PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
systemd 217 introduced support for doing the hibernation resume logic
in the initrd on its own without any external support, see the man
page systemd-hibernate-resume(8). This does not require any explicit
support in Dracut.
On 30 March 2015 at 07:57, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
- provides hibernation support via systemctl hibernate, which is
also what pm-hibernate does (why do we have two tools for the same
core task?)
pm-hibernate should have been removed from Fedora a long time ago. I
On 03/30/2015 11:08 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 30 March 2015 at 07:57, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
- provides hibernation support via systemctl hibernate, which is
also what pm-hibernate does (why do we have two tools for the same
core task?)
pm-hibernate should
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/30/2015 11:08 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 30 March 2015 at 07:57, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
- provides hibernation support via systemctl hibernate, which is
also what pm-hibernate does (why
Luckily, resume from hybernation does not work at all for me on Rawhide:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199708
Vít
Dne 30.3.2015 v 08:57 Till Maas napsal(a):
Hi,
it seems to be that me have a major problem of core package maintainers
coordinating features in Fedora.
See
On 30 March 2015 at 11:21, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
domi...@greysector.net wrote:
Is systemctl hibernate/suspend the official replacement for
pm-hibernate/suspend now?
Very much so :)
Richard.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Monday, 30 March 2015 at 11:08, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 30 March 2015 at 07:57, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
- provides hibernation support via systemctl hibernate, which is
also what pm-hibernate does (why do we have two tools for the same
core task?)
On 30 March 2015 at 15:42, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote:
Can/should we just obsolete / retire it?
I tried to, but I don't have enough super powers.
Richard.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
37 matches
Mail list logo
