Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 17:39:08 -0500 (EST) From: Jonathan Smith <jonsmith@dragonstar.dhs.org> To: Mikko Tyolajarvi <mikko@dynas.se> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP: /etc/rc.shutdown calls local scripts now Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007061738570.86010-100000@dragonstar.dhs.org> In-Reply-To: <200007062218.AAA26263@m2.dynas.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Then what's the problem? -- Close your eyes. Now forget what you see. What do you feel? -- My heart. -- Come here. -- Your heart. -- See? We're exactly the same. Jon Smith -- Senior Math Major @ Purdue On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Mikko Tyolajarvi wrote: > Jonathan Smith wrote: > > >By implementing the 'start' and 'stop' in the local scripts, how much > >should one _expect_ their systems bootup and slow down times to take? > > If the start/stop arguments are coded in a backwards compatible > fashion, there should be no difference. For startup, I can see no > reason why there should be any difference at all [1]. > > As for shutdown, ports that have been fine so far without doing > anything at shutdown should just ignore the "stop" arg, IMHO. Only > processes that really need a clean shutdown should do anything when > given the "stop" argument. > > $.02, > /Mikko > > 1) Ok, make that "hardly any difference" -- the rc scripts will be > a few lines longer and contain an extra conditional of some sort, so > they might be slightly slower ... :) > -- > Mikko Työläjärvi_______________________________________mikko@rsasecurity.com > RSA Security > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0007061738570.86010-100000>