Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:53:36 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn <gary.jennejohn@freenet.de> To: Xin LI <delphij@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "Jason A. Spiro" <jasonspiro4@gmail.com>, Craig Small <csmall@enc.com.au> Subject: Re: Suggestion: rename "killall" to "fkill", but wait five years to phase the new name in Message-ID: <20091222115336.3515e69e@ernst.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <a78074950912212318t7e6e3ac9x334837c9dfb52dbd@mail.gmail.com> References: <c241693f0912212231g5c380246kf12f7bde974bb734@mail.gmail.com> <a78074950912212318t7e6e3ac9x334837c9dfb52dbd@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:18:43 -0800 Xin LI <delphij@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Jason A. Spiro <jasonspiro4@gmail.com> wrote: > > Craig, and hackers, are you both willing to do this? > > No. > > killall is not part of standard, and, just because System V choose to > implement that way, does not warrant that FreeBSD has to. Moreover, > user can always alias /sbin/killall to 'fkill' and 'kill -15 -1' to > 'killall' if they really want the System V behavior. > I'm wondering why we even need killall when pkill seems to have the same basic functionality and is located in /bin (and /rescue) rather than /usr/bin? --- Gary Jennejohn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091222115336.3515e69e>