Re: LSB specification of runlevels
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:47:44PM +0200, Dominik Kubla wrote:
>
> As it is the use of runlevel 5 for xdm clashes with the well-known
> practice of having it rebooting the system to firmware level on System V-
> based systems (most notably Sun's). Granted that is something the
> typical PC user does not need, but since linux works on Sun's as well...
>
This was discussed, but apparently there a number of Linux books
already published which talk about using telinit 5 to enable X. So
while there was some appeal to changing runlevel 5 to synchronize with
the rest of the world had some appeal, Alan Cox argued that to do so
would violate the principle of least surprise for novice users in a
very nasty way.
- Ted
>From alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Sun Mar 4 23:42:55 2001
Message-Id: <m10T59n-0007TvC@the-village.bc.nu>
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: standard run levels (draft 1)
To: hpa@transmeta.com (H. Peter Anvin)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 15:42:51 +0100 (BST)
Cc: quinlan@transmeta.com, lsb-spec@lists.linuxbase.org
In-Reply-To: <199904021153.DAA20012@cesium.transmeta.com> from "H. Peter Anvin" at Apr 2, 99 03:53:13 am
Content-Type: text
> Runlevel 5 has recently become widely used outside the Linux world to
> indicate machine shutoff. I guess it should halt if the machine isn't
> capable of shutting itself off. This would push xdm down into
> runlevel 4.
We should not change this. Too many Linux books tell you about run level 5.
Having everyone reboot their server as they thumb through Linux for the clueless
will not win friends
--
Reply to: