From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 14:05:42 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F57A16A4BF for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail01.stbernard.com (mail01.stbernard.com [64.154.93.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62A2343FF5 for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:05:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from salty.rapid.stbernard.com ([192.168.4.61]) by mail01.stbernard.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:05:41 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr.com To: Daniel Lang , Christopher Nehren Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:05:40 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <1062469541.642.6.camel@prophecy.velum> <1062507323.2163.6.camel@prophecy.velum> <20030902134043.GB17646@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> In-Reply-To: <20030902134043.GB17646@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309021405.40906.wes@softweyr.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Sep 2003 21:05:41.0120 (UTC) FILETIME=[F7659000:01C37195] cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Addition to reboot(8): reboot / halt reasons X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:05:42 -0000 On Tuesday 02 September 2003 06:40, Daniel Lang wrote: > Hi, > > Christopher Nehren wrote on Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 08:55:23AM -0400: > > On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 00:36, Sean Kelly wrote: > > > Err.. Wouldn't it just be easier to use the `shutdown` command? > > > I suggest you check `man 8 shutdown` out. > > > > I'll concede and admit that I should have RTFM'd. But in the same > > vein, if shutdown(8) provides the functionality of halt(8) and > > reboot(8), why do they exist as separate programs? I'm probably > > missing something here, but wouldn't it be easier to just combine > > shutdown and reboot / halt, as reboot and halt already are? > > Yes, you are missing something. > > shutdown(8) is a sort-of frontend to reboot/halt. It contains > additional functionality and calls /sbin/halt or /sbin/reboot. > So the combination already exists. Further halt(8) and > reboot(8) are the same program, as you can easily verify using > ls -i. > > The shutdown(8) frontend adds warning-messages and grace-time > features to reboot/halt. The true answer is "hysterical raisins." Or was that "historical reasons?" Something like that. reboot and halt are BSD commands, shutdown SYSV-ish. Shutdown has all those nice "professional" options to warn users, schedule a shutdown in a few minutes, etc. Reboot and halt expect you to already know how to use at(1) and wall(1) to effect the same results, and to write a script if you really want to do that over and over again. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters wes@softweyr.com