[ltp] T41: swsusp vs. swsusp2

[Matthew Garrett]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 03:59:30PM +0000, honey wrote:

> 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.

The in-kernel code is very much maintained, and the last file-corruption 
issue turned out to be due to someone mounting a filesystem read/write 
before resuming (and so triggering journal playback).

> 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.

It's not entirely clear that suspend2 (in its current form) will be in 
the kernel in any sort of sensible timeframe. There's still disagreement 
over whether certain aspects of it are the correct approach.

> >* Speed
> 
> Suspend2 hands down.

This, however, is absolutely true.
-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org