|
|
Avoid a possible Safe Mode boot issue
Hmm.. I don't see much difference between reboot and halt. I remember halt to be more ungracefully to running tasks, like a reboot -q. Perhaps they want to avoid things happening before a normal reboot. Halt and reboot -q flushes the filesystem caches and force a quite ungracefully shutdown, reboot tends to wait for processes to stop and may write more stuff to the disk which might be unwanted. Both commands send SIGTERM (and subsequently a SIGKILL) to all tasks and do quite the same. Indeed a bit strange and good to know if you do remote controls to OS X machines running for a long time without a fsck.
halt vs. reboot
The difference between halt and reboot, which is a substantial difference, is that halt powers off the machine, while reboot restarts the machine. Halt is not equivalent to 'reboot -q' and in fact both halt and reboot respect the '-q' flag.
halt vs. reboot
Of course halt powers off the machine - but what is the difference between restart from scratch and a power cycle - regarding fsck? Apple decided to power off if root fs is modified - but why? Rebooting does the same as halt except erasing the RAM and other non static memory. If you flash a firmware, OK, no question, but if you fsck? The drives are called quite late in the boot process of OF and they also do a bus-reset while rebooting. So why the halt command instead of reboot?
Avoid a possible Safe Mode boot issue
Well, it's going to ruin your frigging day if it's a remote box and you halted instead of rebooting. |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:HintsNo new hintsComments last 2 daysLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.19 seconds |
|