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: