[Pm-utils] Re: Newer version of pm-utils?
seife at suse.de
Thu Feb 8 01:34:33 PST 2007
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 07:32:59PM +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 20:09 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> > I think that this should of course be handled by s2ram - bypassing the
> > internal whitelist if you want.
> Hmm. I think s2ram (or any "action" program) should just do the suspend
> and let pm-utils do all the other "stuff".
Yes, it does exactly that.
I'm in the process of using the uswsusp infrastructure to make sure that
the workarounds run before the rest of the userspace is restarted which
will make those ugly hacks much more reliable (they get virtually "closer
into the kernel") which you cannot do with lots of vbetool calls.
Another advantage is, that you do not get dependencies on lots of utilities
but only one.
Note that i am not advocating to use s2ram's whitelist feature but only its
QA / R&D Team Mobile Devices | "Any ideas, John?"
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nürnberg | "Well, surrounding them's out."
More information about the Pm-utils