On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 18:16 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 4 September 2014 18:04, Michael Catanzaro
<mcatanzaro(a)gnome.org> wrote:
> And when it's not, it's unreliable at best. I hibernated last week and
> then resumed into a kernel panic....
Given that my laptop lasts many days when suspended on battery power,
I don't lament the missing hibernate. I think it might make things a
lot simpler to just say "not supported". Then the swap size doesn't
have to match the RAM size, which makes things a lot simpler.
I agree: hibernate isn't working reliably enough on the kernel side, and
the implementation has ugly side-effects (constraining swap size). The
entire concept of hibernation is on the way out anyway, if I'm reading
the power management tea leaves right...