Steve Youngs wrote:

> Huh?**Why*would*you*need*or*want*to*do*that?

Surely you can work that out.
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."

* Two Ravens <two-ravens@opera$mail.com> writes:

> Steve Youngs wrote:
>> Huh?**Why*would*you*need*or*want*to*do*that?

> Surely you can work that out.

Actually, no, I can't. I can't think of a single reason to reboot in
this situation. Without saying something like "I've always done it
that way", can you tell me why you would reboot in this situation?


--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| Genius - Is the ability to reduce |
| the complicated to the simple |
|----------------------------------<steve@youngs.au.com>---|

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Eicq - The XEmacs ICQ Client <http://eicq.sf.net/>

iEYEABECAAYFAkJ+qFQACgkQHSfbS6lLMAMSXACgtxZCIja+2h Nl2fa5uIvw/iMP
xzEAnRsZk4HUCN+O/o6TTZDtuAVtHd6N
=M25u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Steve Youngs wrote:

> Actually, no, I can't.**I*can't*think*of*a*single*reason*to*reboot *in
> this situation.**Without*saying*something*like*"I've*al ways*done*it
> that way", can you tell me why you would reboot in this situation?

Both I, and obviously from his question, the OP require that for some
time, and at some intervals our computers are turned off. In the case
of removing the comment (#) from /sbin/modprobe apm, then the easiest
way to check that the computer does indeed shut down is to reboot, (or
to turn it off), using shutdown -h now.

As I spend the mornings out, usually in our local coffee shop, and the
afternoons in other activities, my computer is turned off while I am
out of the house and while I am asleep, Its usually on first thing in
the morning , just after lunch, throughout the evening, and as I don't
sleep too well, at intervals throughout the early hours of the morning.
for the remaining period it is turned off, and thus rebooted at fairly
frequent intervals.
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."

* Two Ravens <two-ravens@opera$mail.com> writes:

> Steve Youngs wrote:
>> Actually, no, I can't.**I*can't*think*of*a*single*reason*to*reboot *in
>> this situation.**Without*saying*something*like*"I've*al ways*done*it
>> that way", can you tell me why you would reboot in this situation?

> In the case of removing the comment (#) from /sbin/modprobe apm,
> then the easiest way to check that the computer does indeed shut
> down is to reboot, (or to turn it off), using shutdown -h now.

Ah! There is my confusion. To me, a "reboot" and a "shutdown" are
two different things. And the former won't show you if having the apm
module loaded will turn off the machine, but the latter will.

--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| Genius - Is the ability to reduce |
| the complicated to the simple |
|----------------------------------<steve@youngs.au.com>---|

Steve Youngs wrote:

>
> Ah! There is my confusion. To me, a "reboot" and a "shutdown" are
> two different things. And the former won't show you if having the apm
> module loaded will turn off the machine, but the latter will.
>

well...what's the word for a shutdown_and_power_up_again action ?
revival ?

i think that's also a reboot.
( a cold reboot ).

cashmir

* cashmir <cashmir@xs4all.nl> writes:

> Steve Youngs wrote:
>> Ah! There is my confusion. To me, a "reboot" and a "shutdown" are
>> two different things.

> well...what's the word for a shutdown_and_power_up_again action ?
> revival ?

If it involved cutting the power (either to the m/board or to the PSU)
it would be 2 actions: A "shutdown" action, followed by a distinct and
separate "power up" action. The first action, the "shutdown" action
is usually invoked via `shutdown -h', `halt', pressing the computer's
"power" button, or by pulling the power cord out of the wall.

If it did not involve cutting the power it would be a _single_ action:
A "reboot" action. Usually invoked via `shutdown -r', `reboot', or
"three-finger-salute".

But at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what you call the
things you do with your computer so I'll shut up about it now.


--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| Genius - Is the ability to reduce |
| the complicated to the simple |
|----------------------------------<steve@youngs.au.com>---|

Steve Youngs wrote:

> Ah! There is my confusion. To me, a "reboot" and a "shutdown" are
> two different things. And the former won't show you if having the apm
> module loaded will turn off the machine, but the latter will.
>
I do apologise, I usually set/remove the comment when running the
configuration process, <xorgconfig> getting wheel mouse to work etc.
and thus 'reboot' to ensure that all is working, immediately after
installing. I just described the process in my initial answer to the
OP. In the case I described there is no shutdown as such, as <shutdown
-h now> is used, followed by a 'reboot', prior to setting up email.
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."

On 7 May 2005 07:08:36 +0200, Ayaz Ahmed Khan mumbled:
>
>
> "No_One" typed:
>> On 2005-05-07, +Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.netWORK> wrote:
>>> What?! No vi?! Thou shalt bow at the altar of Slack and say three
>>> Hail Bobs everyday for a week! Thou must also pay $99.95 to atone.
>>
>> Vi? Vi???. Oh, you mean that ancient program some diehards pretend
>> is a text editor.
>
> Hmm! Doesn't look ancient to me--
>
> ayaz[4][~]$ vi --version
> GNU Emacs 21.3.2
> Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> GNU Emacs comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
> You may redistribute copies of Emacs
> under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
> For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING.
>

Heh. Some of us aren't convinced that 45MB for a text editor is
efficient use of our pr0n storage^W^Wresources.

--
The Sleeper must awaken...

On 2005-05-07, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> espoused the following:
> * Two Ravens <two-ravens@opera$mail.com> writes:
>
> > +Alan Hicks+ wrote:
> > <snip>
> >> # sed -i -e s+^#/sbin/modprobe apm+/sbin/modprobe apm+
> >> # /etc/rc.d/rc.modules
> > <snip>
>
> > Each to his own, I can find my way round Midnight Commander, and
> > GNU/Linux is all about choice. I've just offered another choice/option.
> > (Is not your way more keystrokes than mine?)
>
> I have no way of checking because my /etc/rc.d/rc.modules doesn't
> contain the word "modprobe" in it anywhere, but my guess would be that
> Alan's would be less keystrokes. And even if Alan's is more
> keystrokes, it'd certainly be less time consuming.
>
Especially if you just cut and paste it into a command terminal.

Scott Cole

--
Only trust pipesmoking penguins.

Steve Youngs wrote:

> I have no way of checking because my /etc/rc.d/rc.modules doesn't
> contain the word "modprobe" in it anywhere, but my guess would be that
> Alan's would be less keystrokes. And even if Alan's is more
> keystrokes, it'd certainly be less time consuming.

Are we talking about the same Slackware then? My /etc/rc.d/rc.modules
contains many more than 200 instances of the word 'modprobe' ....

Eric