On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 07:09:21PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 11:46:55PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: > > we leave runlevels completely up to the admin to do with as he > > pleases, as it should be. > > That may be how it should be, but it's not really what we do. There's no > real way of making a "no networking" runlevel, let alone a "multiuser; > no networking" runlevel; if you have a service disabled in your current > runlevel and upgrade it, it'll get started. There are probably some > other related misfeatures/bugs too. it will get started yes, but a link will NOT be put back where i removed it (so long as i leave at least one of the links intact, even if its a K link). the starting daemons out of runlevel is a bug, which will be fixed by invoke-rc.d whenever that goes in. and of course installing a brand new daemon will drop links in all runlevels, but that is far preferable since its predictable. i KNOW that there are now links for that daemon everywhere and can thus customize it quickly. with this hopelessly misguided LSB nonsense i have to check each and every runlevel to see what the hell this particular daemon decided to do. -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgp2Svao3TUOR.pgp
Description: PGP signature