Hi Greg. On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 20:29 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:05:46AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > > > Would you consider including TuxOnIce in it? > > > > I do still want to get it merged and would appreciate feedback. > > Is the patch "stand-alone", only adding new code in discrete chunks like > a new driver or filesystem would? ?The patch I distribute now does have a few parts to it that could be separated into distinct patches (cryptoapi LZF support, fuse freezer support), but the bulk of it is TuxOnIce itself, which just adds new files and inserts the hooks necessary to share the lowlevel code with [u]swsusp. I think, therefore, it would akin to adding a new driver or filesystem. > If not, I don't think it is relevant. Odds are you want to be your own > series of patches, like we discussed years ago, right? I don't think I do want to have my own series of patches, because TuxOnIce doesn't remove or rework swsusp or uswsusp, but sits along side them. I'm not trying to mutate swsusp into TuxOnIce, because that would require a complete rework of swsusp from the ground up (TuxOnIce does everything but the atomic copy/restore ?and associated prep/cleanup differently). Regards, Nigel
