reboot / umount ordering

Kittlitz, Edward (Ned) nkittlitz at alcatel-lucent.com
Wed Feb 13 19:11:06 UTC 2008


Thank you.

My confusion is that the default inittab doesn't have anything in it to
kill processes, just to do the umount and swapoff.

and that's what init.c parse_inittab creates as default actions if there
is no inittab.

regardless of my filesystem issues, it seems a reasonable thing for a
standard reboot or halt to SIGTERM everything.  and busybox itself is
capable to doing that via it kill applet. so I just wonder why it's not
an action in the busybox distro inittab or init.c no-inittab code. But
that's for busybox developers to decide; now that I have a solution,
it's only academic interest to me.

When I looked harder at the code, I see it's supposed to waitfor() each
shutdown item -- i.e. start it and wait for it to complete.  From
watching my console, I thought the items were being started in parallel.

RE you comment about LFS, I suppose I can investigate and/or ask:
  - should I be able to 'umount -r -a' with apps running using files?

  - it seemed lazy umount did not work. I need to spend more time
checking my result.

Ned

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Frysinger [mailto:vapier at gentoo.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 1:34 PM
To: busybox at busybox.net
Cc: Kittlitz, Edward (Ned); Bernhard Fischer
Subject: Re: reboot / umount ordering

On Wednesday 13 February 2008, Kittlitz, Edward (Ned) wrote:
> At the time I reboot, there are several processes still running that
are
> using the filesystems.  With your solution, what is supposed to kill
> those processes?

you kill them, that's how.  if they dont die, you try harder to kill
them.  
the fuser utility is often used in distros to find the offending 
applications.  really though this isnt a busybox issue.  you'd be better
off 
asking on the LFS lists about this sort of thing.
-mike



More information about the busybox mailing list