We have a "cygstart" -- why not a "cygstop"?

We have a "cygstart" -- why not a "cygstop"?

[SJ Wright]

Or does such an idea go too much against the grain of "let's keep Cygwin 
as much of a Unix as possible?"

At the very least, it would cut through all the rigamorole of "kill"-ing 
pids that were likely to return errors.

Comments?

SJ Wright

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Re: We have a "cygstart" -- why not a "cygstop"?

[Andy Koppe]

On 13 June 2011 09:49, SJ Wright wrote:
> Or does such an idea go too much against the grain of "let's keep Cygwin as
> much of a Unix as possible?"
>
> At the very least, it would cut through all the rigamorole of "kill"-ing
> pids that were likely to return errors.
>
> Comments?

Here you go:

alias cygstop '/bin/kill -f'

(See also 'man kill'. Unfortunately Cygwin's version of 'kill' is
usually hidden by a shell builtin, which is why the /bin/ is needed.)

Regards,
Andy

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple