> If that's the case, are you saying that pm-utils should be left in its > current, broken state? While uswsusp might break for people who already > have installed it, mistakenly, there are cases where people cannot > hibernate without using uswsusp (and hence applying some workaround > listed above which may or may not break future upgrades).
Sorry, yes; I believe this is a case where the potential for regressions outweighs the benefits of an SRU. I don't know of any recent hardware that needs uswsusp to do suspend to disk or suspend to ram, but I do think there's a risk that users who have uswsusp installed in hardy but don't need it will see unfavorable behavior changes as a result of this non-standard suspend mechanism. So I think this bug is 'wontfix' for hardy. What hardware do you have that doesn't work with the built-in suspend support? ** Changed in: pm-utils (Ubuntu Hardy) Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix -- pm-utils doesn't detect uswsusp in hardy https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/246053 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs