Sysvinit - modified init.c "sending all processes" string

Ismael Luceno ismael.luceno at gmail.com
Mon Sep 4 19:32:20 PDT 2006


Bryan Kadzban escribió:
> Ismael Luceno wrote:
>> I think "Sending processes controlled by init the TERM signal..." is 
>> better; as processes started by bootscipts, and bootscripts 
>> themselves are not "controlled" by init.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> I could see a user thinking that bootscripts *were* controlled by init
> (I did) -- but they really aren't.  At least, not in a manner that would
> affect these TERM/KILL actions (which is sort of the problem; if you
> already know what processes are being killed, any correct wording should
> work, but otherwise you might get more confused).  Using Bruce's
> "controlled directly" wording should work, though.
> 
> I suppose it probably depends on how much we want to tell the user about
> exactly how sysvinit works through this message.  If it's important that
> the user know that the affected processes will all be listed in
> /etc/inittab, then the "controlled directly by /etc/inittab" wording
> would be better.  If it doesn't matter, the "controlled directly by
> init" version would work just as well.
> 
> What do you think about Bruce's "controlled directly by /etc/inittab"?
> 

It's wrong, because /etc/inittab is a config file, so it doesn't control
anything. The user can get confused with that too...




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list