Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 20:34:43 -0700 From: "Dan O'Connor" <dan@jgl.reno.nv.us> To: <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: "shutdown -h now" risk? Message-ID: <005101bee9f3$de5cc8e0$0200000a@home> References: <6C37EE640B78D2118D2F00A0C90FCB4401105BA8@site2s1> <4.2.0.58.19990818161828.00bdc8e0@toy> <19990818181702.A3248@athena.tera.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The 'reboot' man page says this:
"The halt and reboot utilities flush the file system cache
to disk, send all running processes a SIGTERM (and
subsequently a SIGKILL) and, respectively, halt or restart
the system...."
Then the 'shutdown' man page says this:
"The following options are available:
...
-o If one of the -h, -p or -r is specified, shutdown will execute
halt(8) or reboot(8) instead of sending signal to init(8)."
So, I guess the new question is: What's the difference between the way
"halt" and "reboot" handle shutdowns versus the way "init" does it? And is
one method preferable over the other?
Enquiring minds want to know...
--Dan
** The thing I like most about Windows 98 is...
** You can download FreeBSD with it!
<snip>
> ``shutdown -r now'' does a shutdown and reboot immediately.
> It's ``shutdown now'' that lowers the system from multi-user
> to single-user.
>
> (Unless there was a recent change from 2.2.8 -> 3.2)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?005101bee9f3$de5cc8e0$0200000a>