Re: real LSB compliance
Wichert Akkerman <email@example.com> writes:
> Previously Ethan Benson wrote:
> > runlevels should be sysadmin policy, debian's current default
> > facilitates that best.
> I disagree, the infrastructure makes it possible for the sysadmin to
> change whatever default we use. Making our defaults richer in
> functionality as well as LSB complient is a good goal imho.
I've always appreciated this about Debian - extra functionality is
often there, but never at the cost of flexibility. We give the users
what we can, but not at the cost of compromising maleability of the
system. In this case, we can provide extra functionality, and not
take away the power of the local admin to change things should he or
she desire. There are extra, non-defined run-levels in any case that
even the LSB doesn't mess with.
David N. Welton
Free Software: http://people.debian.org/~davidw/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/