* Lars Wirzenius <liw@iki.fi> [2003-01-30 22:00]:
>> And I simply don't grok that statement. _Why_ do so many people think
>> that way? What is different if the sysadmins have to change the
>> runlevel links from one way to their likes instead of from another way
>> to their likes? There simply is *no* difference imnsho.
>
> There is actually a big difference: the current Debian way is simple and
> easy to understand.
The multiple runlevel system is also simple and easy to understand,
especially because other distributions do it, too! And it encourages
people to _think_ what different runlevels might be used for.
Encouraging people to think is always a good idea.
> It doesn't lead to unwarranted assumptions like "I'm a networking
> daemon, so we must be running in runlevel FOO, so that other daemon
> must also be running". (Seen that.)
That's up to the definition of the runlevel scheme that we will adopt.
No assumptions neccessary.
> It doesn't lead to people thinking that you have to switch runlevels
> in order to start or stop services.
Oh, come on. People that don't read or think shouldn't be the guides
to do something.
> By not imposing a pre-defined (even if avoidable) system, we simplify
> the world for us and for our users.
For which ones? The users that don't change runlevels and stay in the
installed default (which should be 5 imnsho which makes it simply the
same that we currently have)? For the users that are used to different
runlevels on other systems? I don't see for which users this really
simplifies the world....
>> that doesn't want to fiddle with it but have sensible defaults (that is,
>> not four times the completely same runlevel).
>
> I happen to disagree that anything else than our current system would be
> a sensible default. Most people do not need to keep turning services on
> and off all the time, especially not en masse, and thus they benefit
> from having a simple system where they don't have to worry about
> runlevels at all.
So it simply _won't_ make *any difference* to them, if they don't turn
services off and on all the time! They will stay with the default of 5
which is everything installed turned on, just like we currently have,
and live with it. They won't even notice it.
>> Like the LSB-scheme. Aren't we longing for LSB-conformance?
>
> Possibly. I see no point in doing things badly to achieve LSB
> conformance, though.
I seen nothing bad in doing it that way.
> This runlevel thing seems to be one point where I'm willing to be
> non-conforming by default.
This discussion didn't pop up just once, and in fact there were imho
more people for a change (if it is done reasonable, of course) than that
were against it. On the other hand the arguments that are against it
are all quite flawsome imho, I haven't yet seen a real reasoning for the
current scheme instead of "it's always been that way, don't move, it
might hurt" -- which is simply bullshit.
> Debian requires installing the lsb package to achieve conformance, and
> that package can do things to force an LSB runlevel scheme, if such a
> scheme is really necessary for conformance.
How? Putting itself in the postinst apt hook to make sure that newly
installed daemons also set a sensible default instead of pleading that
there is only one runlevel?
> (I find it disappointing, however, if the LSB specifies runlevels in
> that detail. The sysadmin must always have the freedom to rearrange
> things, so even LSB conformant packages shouldn't depend on particular
> runlevel assignmens.)
Are you ignoring that we are still having update-rc.d and that that
script will _not_ interfere with the freedom of the sysadmin? We are
still speaking of _defaults_ here, not of what a local admin might
change. That freedom was always there, is there and will _still_ be
there after the changes.
Again, default runlevel 5 with everything turned on (which is LSB
compliant afaik), and (mostly) everyone should be happy. It won't
change _anything_ for those that don't switch runlevels, it won't change
_anything_ for those that like to adapt the runlevels to their likes, it
just will change it to a level on which the people notice what the
runlevels are for... It might even lead to people that try to
understand, what power different runlevels might have, because they
start to _think_ about it.
Think about it.
Alfie
--
<bli> Von uns allen bleibt nur Asche. Nur die DWN wird man in hundert Jahren
noch nachlesen koennen.
Attachment:
pgpSKXVFIherV.pgp
Description: PGP signature