-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 08/08/2014 03:51 AM, Bonno Bloksma wrote:
> Hi Rodolfo, > >> Two days ago, after full-upgrade, as explained, it was impossible >> to boot neither to reboot and I had to unplug the machine. Thanks >> to lister's help, the above commands through debian-installer in >> rescue mode managed to repair the system. But now two problems >> still remain: > > I can help you with 1 I think > >> 1) I can't halt the system. After the `halt' command, the system stops >> saying >> [. 47.148880] reboot: System halted >> Then nothing happens and I have to unplug the machine; > > [..] > > It was explained a while ago here that a shutdown after halt was > actually a bug. Halt should just halt the system. > ----<quote>----- > Don't shutdown with the halt(8) command, it is not supposed to power > off the machine, and the systemd maintainers consider it a bug[1] > that the sysvinit implementation does it anyway. Use the poweroff > command instead. > > 1. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=746650 > ----</quote>----- I agree that it's good to have separate commands for these two behaviors, and I agree that it's intuitive from a linguistic perspective for the command meaning "don't actually power all the way off" to be 'halt'. However, I strongly disagree with changing the long-established semantics of the 'halt' command. Whether or not it *should* mean "power off", that is what it *has* meant, and people now expect it to mean that; changing that, especially without a long (probably years-long!) deprecation period and a well-publicized flag day, is IMO a very bad idea. For it to be done in that way by systemd is simply going to reinforce the perception of the systemd project and developers as high-handed and authoritarian. Providing a config file setting which lets you make 'halt' actually power off the system (probably overrideable with a command-line option), and having 'halt' print a "Warning, powering off using 'halt' is deprecated, please use 'poweroff' instead" type of message when invoked with that setting, would be a better way to go. Leaving it in that state for two or three years, then removing the setting, would be the right way to transition to the apparently "non-buggy" state. (Though just leaving the option indefinitely for people who want that behavior would IMO be even better.) - -- The Wanderer Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJT5giPAAoJEASpNY00KDJr5c8P/1kqmej06nIDPl3S32jyAMZY vOTDUXlNci2dYeMOmIFI9wyHE2aO8OHS9ASyxjm4jqMvLrHgSA0fHAic5pJHt+zN 5odjZeRjz3QB5MUeqBZTfiz0uoi2nu87v2wxXr9H6BIaWPVumrfgcBdhMrnPka1S iC5Erliwc57Ggta3aar/gPlj0iisBYd0cvic57VTcm8IHdudp/ZEV7gCIF0kFJBe he40Dq0yh8D6Ljc09myk+0Ulii8XSLoiM5c9J/z4TvggTiOQnJYFbjlcw7SnWWdM SXajwOD85HFlxNMh4oTOge2X8/OXrNwhPccunSO1MabDLt4DPfF1Ln4TQs5vlk3j dUa0jzNBL0pCEDcfsLvRrx5WmTUMvfnuedO7nhAbKlR5Xv2No8UuqUudpxMtZHGZ 8uJ8VWCmsFUF4BcYtgGOsb5RYBeGEvlKWLdMN9DjnPTMCXsXgbLPi/OnRkg3rAoA DI1LXBRvCx8VBu8q7BPSHT/IINgeqh/kaRKh5gq6RZtKjI0A6iJWLxsajxVDQ2+o s/Wbn5iEBxprGXGmYiNcXz1KuycPVN4T1vnqwABnn7p0t51q0gpDDePibLiL+o39 Y8LaNEa1HxaRjeRNlH2Mquch/c2AZ1PEyRDRoITJ0K1cD+v4WXL4ZLv7kE4dKEfn 3bqj8DPdedH2nJztvtdv =qGTt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53e6088f.7010...@fastmail.fm
