[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: runlevels [was Re: Upcoming Debian Releases]



vadik@cs.huji.ac.il (Vadim Vygonets)  wrote on 26.05.97 in <Pine.BSI.3.96.970526223242.1034B-100000@robin.cs.huji.ac.il>:

> BTW, why does runlevel 6 mean reboot?  Can't it be runlevel 9?  It (6)
> seems to be the standard in Linux boxen now, but why?

It's been standard in runlevel-based Unix for a long time. That's probably  
because traditionally, 6 is the last available runlevel; so 6 is  
traditionally reboot, and 0 is halt, on every Unix system that has  
runlevels.

I'm not completely sure, but I suspect there's also near-universal  
consensus that 1 is more-or-less single user.

There seems to be a somewhat weaker tradition saying that 2 is normal  
without net, and 3 is normal with net.

Again, none of these traditions are Linux-specific; all are quite a bit  
older than Linux.


MfG Kai


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .


Reply to: