From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762481AbZEGVv0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2009 17:51:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751444AbZEGVvS (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2009 17:51:18 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:39996 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751082AbZEGVvR (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2009 17:51:17 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 23:51:12 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Nigel Cunningham , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tuxonice-devel@lists.tuxonice.net Subject: Re: [RFC] TuxOnIce Message-ID: <20090507215112.GC14611@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1241620755-22133-1-git-send-email-nigel@tuxonice.net> <20090507120948.GA1531@ucw.cz> <200905071942.54936.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200905071942.54936.rjw@sisk.pl> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 2009-05-07 19:42:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday 07 May 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > I'd like to submit TuxOnIce for review, with a view to seeking to get it > > > merged, perhaps in 2.6.31 or .32 (depending upon what needs work before > > > it can be merged) and the willingness of those who matter. ... > > To summarise disadvantages: > > > > - only core has 8000 LoC > > - it does stuff that can be easily done in userspace > > (and that todays distros _do_ in userspace). > > - it duplicates uswsusp functionality. > > - compared to [u]swsusp, it received little testing > > Actually, I see advantages of working together versus fighting flame wars. > Please stop that, I'm not going to take part in it this time. Ok, so what do you propose? Merging tuxonice into 2.6.32, resulting in having swsusp,uswsusp *and* tuxonice to maintain? I hope not. If we are talking about improving mainline to allow tuxonice functionality... then yes, that sounds reasonable. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html