I think what many of us would like to hear is some reasons. I feel certain that there must be some reason that the Ubuntu kernel developers didn't want to just go back to using SLAB until this is fixed. Or some reason that they "refused" to make a special kernel version. But thus far in this bug, no such reasons have been given, and without them it simply appears that Ubuntu doesn't care. Perhaps because the kernel devs don't use ATI based laptops. I understand that making such decisions is a difficult task, and taking the time to explain all of your decisions is very time consuming, but in this case, the decisions made have a significant negative impact on a significant number of users, and without an explanation, they all feel left out in the cold with a significant functional regression from the previous version.
If Ubuntu is supposed to be openly and publicly developed, then information behind these decisions should be made available. And if Ubuntu is supposed to be about humanity to others, it would be nice to know why these decisions that seem particularly inhumane must be made. Ubuntu developers refusing is not a good enough reason. I have a T60p, which the opensource ATI drivers don't support, so I have to use the vesa driver if I don't get fglrx working. There are all kinds of reasons I don't want to use the vesa driver. One of the largest visible ones is the lack of dpms support. I can't blank my screen to save power. So I'll just have to recompile a kernel without SLUB, but that's inconvenient for me, and I don't understand Ubuntu wouldn't want to offer this for me. I know there's a good reason. Just please share it with us. Thanks, Joel -- [gutsy] fglrx breaks over suspend/resume https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/121653 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
