From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 29 15:26:02 2009 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 547E91065679; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:26:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C148FC0C; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:26:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C631A46B0D; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:26:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:26:01 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Pegasus Mc Cleaft In-Reply-To: <2381D3CBDFB94F36ACFC9146E95AF32D@PegaPegII> Message-ID: References: <4AC141B0.4090705@delphij.net> <86ws3iexl3.fsf@ds4.des.no> <86ske5gav0.fsf@ds4.des.no> <2381D3CBDFB94F36ACFC9146E95AF32D@PegaPegII> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras Subject: Re: [PATCH] Shutdown cooloff feature 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, 29 Sep 2009 15:26:02 -0000 On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Pegasus Mc Cleaft wrote: >> I could be convinced by an argument that reboot and shutdown -r should be >> the same, and that both should talk to init, which should perform the >> reboot system call. Since init is what runs rc.shutdown, and it already >> knows if it's in multiuser mode (since it defines multiuser mode), it >> should be able to DRT. My belief is that most people who type in "reboot" >> do so thinking it means the same thing as "shutdown -r ". > > I have always used "reboot" to be the nasty "Just pop the reset button" > kind of shutdown. I have a system that hystorically locks up after BSD does > a proper shutdown/reboot and when I am working remotely, after doing many > sync's I call "reboot -nq" (it seems to like that :> ). I suppose in my mind > I have always thought of the reboot command as being a sledge hammer where > "shutdown -r" was the polite version. I wouldent want to loose the > brute-force power of "reboot". Yes -- I think if we made this change, we'd want "-f" to force reboot w/o doing the harder work. Or maybe -or is this, in practice. Robert