Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:54:33 +0200
Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Lu, 03 mar 14, 11:27:59, Celejar wrote:
> > Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Depending on RAM size and what you were running at the time you set your
> > > computer to hibernate it may just take longer to resume (i.e. read the
> > > stuff from slow storage) than to cold boot. This may have been solved in
> >
> > When you say longer than cold boot, do you really mean longer than cold
> > booting plus starting all the stuff you had running in RAM and getting
> > them to the state they were in?
>
> As I said, I have little practical experience with hibernate myself,
> this is just what I picked up here on the list. Besides, I wouldn't
> trust hibernate with unsaved files and I use lightweight apps as much as
> possible, so for me the benefits are just not worth it.
I, too, don't like trusting unsaved files to hibernate. But I also
wouldn't trust all my individual applications autosaving of files (even
where such exist). So when I need to power down the machine, I have two
choices: halt and hibernate, and in any event, I'll want to save all
important work first. So why would I reboot instead of hiberate?
Celejar
Reply to: