From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 22 23:07:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3914016A4CE for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:07:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gw.Awfulhak.org (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [80.177.173.150]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8274B43D48 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:07:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from dev.lan.Awfulhak.org (brian@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org [172.16.0.5]) by gw.Awfulhak.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id i7MN7bk8079368; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 00:07:37 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 00:07:37 +0100 From: Brian Somers To: "Cyrille Lefevre" Message-Id: <20040823000737.418f814a@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: <071a01c48892$5483c0e0$7890a8c0@gits.invalid> References: <20040821191659.GA94336@gothmog.gr> <20040821202252.GB94336@gothmog.gr> <20040821235048.6244270a@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org> <071a01c48892$5483c0e0$7890a8c0@gits.invalid> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.64 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on gw.lan.Awfulhak.org cc: Giorgos Keramidas cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Introducing a poweroff(8) command X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:07:53 -0000 On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:52:32 +0200, "Cyrille Lefevre" wrote: > "Brian Somers" wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:22:52 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas > wrote: > > > On 2004-08-21 22:16, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > In response to PR misc/70476 about `halt -p' I wrote a simple patch to > > > > introduce a "poweroff" command that will default to "halt -p" behavior > > > > and inhibit the need for changing the default behavior of halt(8). > > > > > > > > o Does this look ok to you all? > > > > > > > > o Should I suggest using it as a workaround of the behavior > > > > described in the PR? > > > > > > It would be nice if I also included the patch :-? > > > > IMHO poweroff should behave like ``shutdown -p now'' rather than ``halt -p''. > > > no, poweroff usually behaves as "halt -p", not "shutdown -p". > see Solaris and NetBSD for details. This does seem to be true, and in fact, Linux's poweroff is also ``halt -p''. The unusual thing about linux is that without the -f option, halt/reboot/poweroff will call shutdown (this is where I got the assumption that ``poweroff'' was equivalent to shutdown)! I don't think it's a good idea to encourage users to use shutdown methods that don't run the rc.d scripts, but I also don't think we should deviate from what others do without good reason! So I'll just take my oar back out and apologise for getting it wrong! -- Brian Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !