Subject: Re: killall(1) ?
To: Soren S. Jorvang <email@example.com>
From: Jaromir Dolecek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/22/1999 13:04:13
Soren S. Jorvang wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 01:06:58AM +0100, Jaromir Dolecek wrote:
> > anyone would argue against adding a killall(1) script/program ?
> > I use it frequently on Irix and found it handy many times :)
> That would be nice. Just please don't call it 'killall' as
> that means very different things on various systems.
I can only look at Irix, Linux, Solaris and Digital Unix 4.0. Solaris
and D.U. support only sending the signal to all processes,
Irix also supports sending to named process, Linux supports only
sending to named processes.
I hope the Solaris and Digital Unix killall(1) complains when called
with extra arguments and won't do anything ?
I don't see that the killall(1) program would do very different
things on various systems, so IMHO there is no reason NetBSD killall(1)
would not be named killall(1) :-)
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org> http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolecek/
@@@@ Wanna a real operating system ? Go and get NetBSD, damn it! @@@@