On Saturday 01,May,2010 06:29 AM, Scott James Remnant wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 19:45 +0000, Chow Loong Jin wrote: > >> About that false negative you pointed out, I think you are getting the >> wrong idea. I never intended to remove the wait-for-root call. In my >> proposed solution, the wait-for-root call stays, and *AFTER* that, it >> unconditionally attempts a resume, without checking the output of wait- >> for-root. Hence, the resume script will wait for the swap device, and >> then attempt a resume no matter what wait-for-root says. >> > We don't want to unconditionally attempt a resume; we should only > attempt a resume if there was a signature. > > Unconditionally attempting resumes can cause problems.
Like what? I had already mentioned -- a false positive will be ignored by the kernel, and on non-Ubuntu systems without initrds, which are pretty common, the resume= kernel option is checked unconditionally. Plus, we've never had problems arising from false positives in the past, so they shouldn't be appearing now, when reverting to old behaviour. > >> And about the SRU... >> >From the looks of it, resume_offset was a feature of the past >> initramfs-tools. Dropping support for this, however accidental, is >> considered a regression. >> > It was never a feature we supported - therefore it is not a regression. resume_offset was supported, and was *explicitly* checked for in the resume script. I don't see how that becomes a feature that was never supported. -- Kind regards, Chow Loong Jin -- Resume from disk (swapfile) fails https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/554009 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
