Subject: Re: Geek Appreciation Day (Boston)
To: Andrew Brown <>
From: Greywolf <>
List: netbsd-advocacy
Date: 04/03/2000 16:18:22
On Mon, 3 Apr 2000, Andrew Brown wrote:

# >I think that state is better referred to as 'halt'.  i386s don't halt,
# >really, they pause, but: powerdown/halt/reboot/single/multi, yeah, that's
# >about right.  Oh, yeah: [1]: Yes.
#'s about as "halt" as they can, but yes.  you realize, of
# course, that now *you're* being pedantic.  :)

Of course.  VAX 11/750s don't halt, either -- you have to hit ^P at the
console to get them to halt.

# >I'd like to see us skip the single-letter naming convention for run-levels
# >and just run symbolically.
# maybe we could just give them names?

Yeah, that was the idea.  (...didn't I just say that?  Hmm...)

# i remember reading somewhere that the best way to tell a sysv system
# from bsd system was to look at two things: whether or not the system
# has a file called /etc/inittab and the format of the accounting file.

...and compile something that uses signals, and see whether the traps reset
themselves or if you have to reset them once you catch the signal...


BSD:  Can we risk exposing the humans to our advanced technology?