On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Otavio Salvador wrote:
at> Sure, this perfectly descirbes the situation. But IMHO it would be better at> if the SwSuspend2 would flush all write operations and work down the at> journal of your file system to minimize the potential data loss. While at> I perfectly know (even before reading the FAQ) that I did something stupid, at> it is IMHO much better to have a consistent file system at all times when at> your computer is switched of. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
But in this case, it's not swsusp2 failt but hibernate script fault. I
OK - understand.
think you can hack it to do a sync before hibernate the system and then you solve this issue.
My complete lack of knowledge in this field might have become obvious in this thread, right? Do you think it is worth a bug report against hibernate?
The problem described there isn't it but the wrong use of swap when you did a suspend and try to load it with a normal kernel...
I'm wrong?
No, you are right and I used a wrong kernel. But as I said: IMHO it is a very good idea to have a consistent FS when having a computer switched off. Perhaps you will be forced to use a different kernel (rescue disc whatever) and thus a sync before suspending is allways a good idea. I have not enough knowledge to decide whether the sync is hibernate's or SwSusp's job.
Kind regards
Andreas.
-- http://fam-tille.de
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
