Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 02 Jul 1997 19:54:43 -0700
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To:        =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
Cc:        FreeBSD-current <current@FreeBSD.ORG>, Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>, Chuck Robey <chuckr@Glue.umd.edu>, Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Subject:   Re: ppp & HUP.
Message-ID:  <33BB1473.33590565@whistle.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.970703060227.268B-100000@nagual.pp.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2 Jul 1997, Brian Somers wrote:
> 
> > > > reboot(8) will send SIGTERMs to the processes, but not SIGHUPs.
> >
> > death() in init.c :(
> 
> I start thinking that sending HUP from init is a bug because:
> 1) It increase disk activity just before shutdown since all daemons
> re-read their configs.
> 2) It cause redials for redial-able software as uucp (and ppp some time
> ago).
> 
> If nobody will explain why this HUP is neded (hanging shells perfectly
> killed by SIGKILL), I'll remove HUP sending from init.
> 
I have processes that close down  assuming they have
 5 or 6 seconds to do so when they receive HUP.
it's traditional. I don't like changing such traditions..



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?33BB1473.33590565>