Fwd: Graphical Shutdown

[seth vidal]

On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 14:15 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 14:04 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 13:49 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > Jesse Keating (jkeating at redhat.com) said: 
> > > > I was thinking about this over the weekend.  We have "shutdown"
> > > > sections in services so that you can restart a service while running,
> > > > however we don't necessarily have to "shut down" the services when we
> > > > shut down the system.
> > > 
> > > Right, and not doing it cuts shutdown in half. However, since it's a
> > > change in interface, you'd have to tag each service that you don't care
> > > about shutting down separately. Which sucks.
> > > 
> > 
> > would this be as a simple as modifying chkconfig so that if there isn't
> > a 3rd field in the:
> > # chkconfig: levels start_order stop_order
> > 
> > line in an initscript that it just didn't make the stop symlink?
> 
> Doesn't this potentially interfere with un-mounting file systems?
> So we always kill -9 em?

I think we kill -term then we kill -9 them.

But that's a lot lighter than running an init script for each.

-sv