On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 11:39:15PM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> Op Sun, 5 Oct 2008 14:55:30 +0200
> schreef Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 09:54:33AM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> > > > Do you have a number which amount of machines have problems?
> > > The number of machines that didn't came up by itself always used to
> > > be much bigger than the number that did.
>
> I looked at some numbers. We currently have +/- 400 machines listed, of
> which +/1 100 need no work around.
Which is around 25% of all listed ones.
> > linux-acpi is the responsible list for most of the problems. There is
> > a standard interface for that.
> What do you mean standard interface?
The ACPI video interface.
> > Okay, then I insist that uswsusp is not installed along any Debian
> > provided kernels and will enforce that with a conflict because it
> > breaks suspend for many machines.
> This is nonsense.
No. I did not make it an always installed package.
> It fixes suspend for more machines than it breaks. Without it (or
> similar functionality that can be provided by pm-utils in combination
> with various other packages) it will leave 75% of laptop users without a
> functioning suspend/resume. We already have a lot machines that do not
> need a quirk whitelisted, so the number of people we are `hurting' is
> far less than 25%.
It hurts 100% of my machines, my workstation, my really old notebook, my
current notebook and my test notebook. The notebooks have proper ACPI
support for suspending.
Anyway: How do you intend to update the whitelist during the release
cycle? Maybe I missed a mail on debian-release regarding this.
Bastian
--
If some day we are defeated, well, war has its fortunes, good and bad.
-- Commander Kor, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
