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

Re: real LSB compliance

On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 03:15:32PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
>On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 02:07:38PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
>> * LSB defines runlevels, while we define 2-5 identically by default.
>>     2 multiuser with no network services exported
>>     3 normal/full multiuser
>>     4 reserved for local use, default is normal/full multiuser
>>     5 multiuser with xdm or equivalent
>more `lets make whatever redhat does standard!' runlevels are sysadmin
>policy, not some retarded `standards' group.  ignore this.  

Why immediately presume that this is a RedHat-ism?  We are talking about
sysvinit after all and System V has used differentiated run-levels for
as long as I can recall.

Those specific semantics are pretty much what I recall from SVR2
although X wasn't an issue and run-level 5 was "firmware".

I'd quite like to see this implemented, although it would be quite
tricky to implement from an upgrade perspective.

Brendan O'Dea                                        bod@compusol.com.au
Compusol Pty. Limited                  (NSW, Australia)  +61 2 9810 3633

Reply to: