Re: [ACPI] Re: [2.5.50, ACPI] link error

[Ducrot Bruno <poup@poupinou.org>]

On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 12:01:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > I think that s4bios is nice to have. Its similar to S3 and easier to
> > > set up than swsusp... It would be nice to have it.
> > 
> > for me:
> > pros:
> > -----
> > 1- it is really really more easier to implement than S4;
> > 2- we can even have it with 2.4 kernels (it seems that it work without
> > the need of freezing processes, but I suspect that this statement
> > is 'wrong' by nature).
> > 
> > cons:
> > -----
> > 1- it is much slower (especially at save time) than your swsusp;
> > 2- end users must setup their systems (need to create a suspend partition,
> > or to keep a vfat partition as the really first one (/dev/hda1));
> > 3- we use a bios function.  Actually, everything can happen...
> > 
> > That why I prefer swsusp at this time, or any other implementation of S4 (I
> > think about an implementation of S4 via LKCD).
> 
> Yes I think swsusp is better (long term), but it might be worth it to
> have S4bios, too. At least it has nice graphical task bars :-). Can
> you push the patch, or is it okay for me to try to get it merged?
> 

Ok, ok.  I will try to push the patch.

-- 
Ducrot Bruno
http://www.poupinou.org        Page profaissionelle
http://toto.tu-me-saoules.com  Haume page