[ltp] Re: T41: swsusp vs. swsusp2

[Shannon McMackin]

honey wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Felix E. Klee wrote:
> 
>> I recently acquired a T41 and I'd like to know:
>>
>>  Is there any advantage in using Software Suspend 2 instead of the
>>  Software Suspend built into the original kernel?
>>
>> In particular, I'm interested in the following aspects:
>>
>> * Stability
> 
> 
> Hard one to call.  Swsusp (1) is ancient and pretty much unmaintained
> as far as I can see.  It's in the kernel, but distros like Red Hat
> refused to switch it on by default as it still provoked the occasional
> accusation of file corruption on lkml.
> 
> Swsusp2, aka suspend2 has a really solid, friendly and competent
> development team behind it, and is on its way into the kernel (see
> recent discussions on lkml) but isn't there yet.  Try #suspend2 on
> Freenode or the mailing list and see what a nice responsive community it
> is - a pleasant surprise.  It had a rough patch 6 months ago but has
> been rock solid for me for ages.  I've never lost a file to it: some
> have, but I suspect they didn't know how to recover properly during that
> rough patch.
> 
> If you happen to be using Fedora,
> http://mhensler.de/swsusp/download_en.php makes it an easy choice.
> 
>> * Speed
> 
> 
> Suspend2 hands down.
> 
> Honey
In checking back, I was successful in getting suspend2 to run on a
vanilla 2.6.14.1 kernel in Ubuntu Breezy.  I will say that based on the
recommendations in the Ubunut forum, it's very slow.  Worse than
standard suspend in most distros.

Something on the order of ~2min to suspend and maybe ~3-4min to resume.
 Cold boots are better than that.

I will keep fiddling because I don't think all the hibernate settings
recommended make sense.

Shannon