Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:58:23 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Coleman Kane <cokane@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie>, Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/reboot reboot.c Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1010326125637.74228F-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20010326114846.A83061@cokane.yi.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Coleman Kane wrote:
> I am in agreement with Kris and Garrett on this one. I too have seen
> Linux init hold up the system until it is powered off. Typically, this
> is because of my own stupidity, but it is nice to be able to seperately
> down the box gracefully.
However, what you could imagine is a scenario where: (a) reboot(8) and
halt(8) signal init(8) to perform sane system shutdown by default, but (b)
have a new flag that specifies that rather than taking down the system via
the supported shutdown sequence, to directly kill system processes and
request the kernel halt the system. This would distinguish the sane and
orderly shutdown of init from the "it's not working" behavior of reboot
and halt, while combining code paths in the common ("it is working") case.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1010326125637.74228F-100000>