← Back to team overview

documentation-packages team mailing list archive

[Bug 1603313] Re: Misleading information regarding system suspend

 

The quoted para in the desktop guide origins from
<https://help.gnome.org/users/gnome-help/stable/power-suspendfail.html>.

If you have constructive ideas on how to improve the compatibility of
the suspend feature with various hardware out there, please share them
via e.g. the ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list.

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

An ubuntu-docs bug report is not a proper place to hold a debate on this
topic.

** Changed in: ubuntu-docs (Ubuntu)
       Status: New => Invalid

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Documentation Packages, which is subscribed to ubuntu-docs in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1603313

Title:
  Misleading information regarding system suspend

Status in ubuntu-docs package in Ubuntu:
  Invalid

Bug description:
  The page at https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/ubuntu-help/power-
  suspendfail.html states:

  "If you suspend or hibernate your computer, then try to resume it or
  turn it back on, you may find that it does not work as you expected.
  This could be because suspend and hibernate aren't supported properly
  by your hardware"

  -- that may be possible, but it is at least extremely improbable.
  Most PCs have been sold with Microsoft Windows operating systems for
  many years, which are capable of resuming computers from suspend.
  Ubuntu's explanation is deliberately misleading and essentially false;
  far more accurate is the following:

  "If you suspend or hibernate your computer, then try to resume it or
  turn it back on, you may find that it does not work as you expected.
  This is because suspend and hibernate aren't supported properly by
  Linux operating systems including Ubuntu"

  Does Canonical understand the difference between hardware and
  software?

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-docs/+bug/1603313/+subscriptions


Follow ups

References