Bryan Kadzban wrote: > This one has bugged me off and on for a couple years. ;-) Since I'm > rebuilding my system again, I just saw the sed again, and figured now > would be a good time to propose a modification. > > We currently modify Sysvinit so that instead of printing: > > Sending processes the TERM signal... > Sending processes the KILL signal... > > when changing runlevels, it prints: > > Sending processes started by init the TERM signal... > Sending processes started by init the KILL signal...
> Anyway, I'd propose changing this message into: > > Sending inittab(5) respawn-action processes the TERM signal... > Sending inittab(5) respawn-action processes the KILL signal... > > instead. (Or maybe just "inittab", if we don't want to point the user > to the inittab manpage. Or maybe "/etc/inittab". All three versions > should still fit into an 80-column display.) Chris, I think there may be more to this. If a process is running that was started with the action ONCE and has not terminated (e.g. sulogin), it may be killed also. This makes your wording incorrect. Perhaps the wording should be "Sending processes controlled by inittab ..." I agree that it is hard to get the right wording in one line. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
