sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- To: Chris Dombroski <cdombroski AT gambit.gotdns.org>, sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Cc:
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 16:43:20 -0500
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 03:51 pm, Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:35:16PM -0500, Chris Dombroski wrote:
> > Quoting Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>:
> > >What can you do in sysvinit that can't be done in a simpleinit setup?
> >
> > Just to throw my two cents in, I have had no luck getting intelligent ups
> > shutdown working with simpleinit.
>
> I wish it to be known that this has nothing to do with the type of init
> system. Simpleinit requires the same type of work one would do in
> sysvinit for this.
>
Just the works already done for sysvinit, and most UPS programs (nut for
example) explain how to set it up for sysvinit and we had difficulty figuring
out how to do it for simpleinit.
>
> I believe what you want to do is put it in the DEV runlevel and give it
> stuff to do on stop() and make an empty start() function. That will
> linearize it to happen after mountall.sh stops. We're going to be using
> mountall.sh's stop() routine instead of simpleinit's as well since
> simpleinit is not using an adequately powerful unmount process for all
> filesystem types. I'm not sure how far along this has been done yet,
> though.
That was the major draw back with UPS support and simpleinit. We had no way
of
guaranteeing that the system had been almost completely shut down before
attempting to send the powerdown signal to the ups.
>
> You can also make the ups script itself unmount the filesystems, too.
True, but that's not quite as nice. And it should be done inplace of calling
the Kernel Power Off.
There goes swoolley being a genius again, Always solving the worlds
problems... :)
David
Attachment:
pgpoJOBtYXl6a.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Dragan Stanojevic - Nevidljivi, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Andrew "ruskie" Levstik, 06/14/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?, Andrew "ruskie" Levstik, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Seth Alan Woolley, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Chris Dombroski, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Seth Alan Woolley, 06/14/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?, David Kowis, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Seth Alan Woolley, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Chris Dombroski, 06/14/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Andrew, 06/14/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 06/15/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Dragan Stanojevic - Nevidljivi, 06/15/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Seth Alan Woolley, 06/15/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Dragan Stanojevic - Nevidljivi, 06/17/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?, Dragan Stanojevic - Nevidljivi, 06/18/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Dragan Stanojevic - Nevidljivi, 06/17/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Seth Alan Woolley, 06/15/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why simpleinit-msb ?,
Andrew "ruskie" Levstik, 06/14/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.