svn commit: r216823 - head/sbin/shutdown

Alexander Best arundel at
Fri Dec 31 19:00:59 UTC 2010

On Fri Dec 31 10, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 03:43:08PM +0100, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 06:06:31PM +0000, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> > > Author: pjd
> > > Date: Thu Dec 30 18:06:31 2010
> > > New Revision: 216823
> > > URL:
> > 
> > > Log:
> > >   For compatibility with Linux and Solaris add poweroff(8).
> > 
> > >   It is implemented as a hard link to shutdown(8) and it is equivalent of:
> > 
> > >   	# shutdown -p now
> > 
> > If we go that way, then for consistency reboot(8) and halt(8) should
> > also be equivalent to calling shutdown -r now and shutdown -h now
> > respectively, unless conflicting options are given. Linux has a -f
> > option for what's currently reboot's and halt's default action, and
> > fastboot(8)/fasthalt(8) could also retain the current behaviour.
> > 
> > I would be in favour of this change.
> I would not be in favour of such a change.  Adding a new command that
> did not previously exist in FreeBSD (e.g.  poweroff(8)) is one thing,
> and is unlikely to break anything or confuse anybody.
> Changing the meaning of a command that is already present in FreeBSD is
> something else, which is far more likely to cause problems.  Such
> changes should generally be avoided unless there is some really good
> reason to do it, and I don't think such a reason exists in this case.

of course you have a point there. on the other hand one can argue that the
current behavior is non-intuitive. most of the time users want to reboot or
halt a system nicely including execution of the rc.shutdown scripts. the
names "reboot" and "halt" suggest that these commands do exactly what i
described beforehand: to reboot or halt the system regularly.
in fact reboot and halt will not execute certain scripts and thus it is
recomended to use "shutdown -r now" or "shutdown -h now". why should
executables for a regular reboot and halt *not exist*, while executables
for a non-regular reboot and halt *do exist*?

even more: there are 2 executables for a non-reguar reboot and 2 for a
non-regular halt (reboot/fastboot and halt/fasthalt).

another thought: running 'reboot' instead of 'shutdown -r now' *can* cause
harm to the system, because an important rc.shutdown script wasn't executed.
however running 'shutdown -r now' in single-user mode e.g. will cause a few
sterr warnings; however it *cannot* cause any harm.

so if the semantics for reboot and halt get changed, nothing bad can happen
except for a few people wondering why suddenly reboot and halt execute
rc.shutdown scripts in single user mode and produce warnings.

so i vote for the following:
change 'reboot' to execute 'shutdown -r now'.
change 'halt' to execute 'shutdown -h now'.

fastboot and fasthalt should keep their current semantical behavior and would
need to become exectables rather than hardlinks to reboot/halt.

just my 0.02$.


> -- 
> <Insert your favourite quote here.>
> Erik Trulsson
> ertr1013 at


More information about the svn-src-all mailing list