May I ask if there is a purpose to this other than doing it as a learning experience (if so, then by all means carry on)? Do you see a problem with just using current s6-linux-init?
Of course you may ask!Initially I wanted to learn and understand a proper (init/)shutdown procedure of UNIX like OS's. But I figured, that if the scripted procedures turn out elegant and robust enough, which - in my opinion - seems to be the case (again everybody please point out any flaws you find),
I would like to use them over s6-linux-init because
a) The scripts are very easy to port to other UNIX like OS's. b) I am a big fan of 1 tool 1 job combined in a script.c) The scripts are easier to understand (and modify) for sysadmins with little programming background.
I see no problem at all in s6-linux-init, it has worked 100% reliable on my machine for half a year now.
Perhaps you already know, but if you are interested in comparing, one
can still download s6-linux-init-0.4.0.1 from the skarnet.org website
for studying, which is the last version that used an execline stage1
init, performed the shutdown procedure in .s6-svscan/finish and
shipped small C programs that probably did the same thing that
linux-powertool does here, before the change in package design —which
also surprised me a the time—. Although s6 dropped in version 2.10.0.0
the functionality that allowed those to work, and you'd need
skalibs-2.8.0.1 to be able to actually build and run that version of
s6-linux-init-maker and s6-{halt,poweroff,reboot}.
Thanks for the heads up! I did not know about that, that was before I discovered skarnet. I will definitely look into that. Regards, Paul
OpenPGP_0x71C7C85A2EA30F62.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
