Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 01:18:39PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 09 juin 2005 à 10:53 +0200, Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
> > Now, that is why we have runlevel 1. But in most cases, wasting
> > runlevels to things that could just as easily be fixed by ending the
> > attempts to start is silly.
>
> How would these runlevels be "wasted"? We're only talking about the
> default configuration, not about something a system administrator
> couldn't change.
In theory.
In practice, many third-party applications will make assumptions about
the availability and configuration of runlevels, and will break horribly
if anything is different from what they expect; this has happened on
those RedHat systems that I've tried this on.
--
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond
Reply to: