From owner-cvs-all Mon Mar 26 9:58:33 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D633837B718; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 09:58:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f2QHwNh76442; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:58:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:58:23 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Coleman Kane Cc: Ian Dowse , Peter Jeremy , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/reboot reboot.c In-Reply-To: <20010326114846.A83061@cokane.yi.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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