This sounds very nice.. can such a thing be done with the reset switch as
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, David Balazic wrote:
> I had a similar experience:
> X crashed , hosing the console , so I could not initiate
> a proper shutdown.
> Here I must note that the response you got on linux-kernel is
> What I did was to write a kernel/apmd patch , that performed a
> proper shutdown when I press the power button ( which luckily
> works as long as the kernel works ).
> Ask me for details, if interested.
> The patch was for 2.2.x IIRC, so I would have to rewrite it almost
> from scratch.
> Otto Wyss (email@example.com) wrote :
> > Lately I had an USB failure, leaving me without any access to my system
> > since I only use an USB-keyboard/-mouse. All I could do in that
> > situation was switching power off and on after a few minutes of
> > inactivity. From the impression I got during the following startup, I
> > assume Linux (2.4.2, EXT2-filesystem) is not very suited to any power
> > failiure or manually switching it off. Not even if there wasn't any
> > activity going on.
> > Shouldn't a good system allways try to be on the save side? Shouldn't
> > Linux try to be more fail save? There is currently much work done in
> > getting high performance during high activity but it seems there is no
> > work done at all in getting a save system during low/no activity. I
> > think this is a major drawback and should be addressed as fast as
> > possible. Bringing a system to save state should allway have a high priority.
> > How could this be accomplished:
> > 1. Flush any dirty cache pages as soon as possible. There may not be any
> > dirty cache after a certain amount of idle time.
> > 2. Keep open files in a state where it doesn't matter if they where
> > improperly closed (if possible).
> > 3. Swap may not contain anything which can't be discarded. Otherwise
> > swap has to be treated as ordinary disk space.
> > These actions are not filesystem dependant. It might be that certain
> > filesystem cope better with power failiure than others but still it's
> > much better not to have errors instead to fix them.
> > Don't we tell children never go close to any abyss or doesn't have
> > alpinist a saying "never go to the limits"? So why is this simple rule
> > always broken with computers?
> > O. Wyss
> David Balazic
> "Be excellent to each other." - Bill & Ted
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- Gerhard Mack
<>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 23 2001 - 21:00:21 EST