From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 27 12:39:09 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A284106566B; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:39:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hselasky@freebsd.org) Received: from swip.net (mailfe06.c2i.net [212.247.154.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0F48FC18; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:39:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Cloudmark-Score: 0.000000 [] X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=MmhuielNmoAwiWCiiefMnqMoo9XwPcHPH2oGFNV1oLM= c=1 sm=1 a=SvYTsOw2Z4kA:10 a=PuyOCL9SsrEA:10 a=dBRESv0yCI8A:10 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=CL8lFSKtTFcA:10 a=i9M/sDlu2rpZ9XS819oYzg==:17 a=TaXam_rxXLm-ed4RJQQA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=i9M/sDlu2rpZ9XS819oYzg==:117 Received: from [188.126.198.129] (account mc467741@c2i.net HELO laptop002.hselasky.homeunix.org) by mailfe06.swip.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.19) with ESMTPA id 183639359; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:29:05 +0200 Received-SPF: softfail receiver=mailfe06.swip.net; client-ip=188.126.198.129; envelope-from=hselasky@freebsd.org From: Hans Petter Selasky To: Adrian Chadd Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:26:06 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-STABLE; KDE/4.4.5; amd64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: X-Face: *nPdTl_}RuAI6^PVpA02T?$%Xa^>@hE0uyUIoiha$pC:9TVgl.Oq, NwSZ4V"|LR.+tj}g5 %V,x^qOs~mnU3]Gn; cQLv&.N>TrxmSFf+p6(30a/{)KUU!s}w\IhQBj}[g}bj0I3^glmC( :AuzV9:.hESm-x4h240C`9=w MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201109271426.06450.hselasky@freebsd.org> Cc: "crsnet.pl" , "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: [Solved] FreeBSD 9-Beta3 on X300 2 problems X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:39:09 -0000 On Tuesday 27 September 2011 13:53:41 Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hans, > > Why haven't those patches been committed? I don't know. There is no reason that they shouldn't, except I believe pause() should have the checks for cold and resuming/suspending instead of USB. Must have been forgotten :-) --HPS