Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
From: Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>
Date: 14 Jan 2004 14:41:55 +0000
Message-id: <[🔎] 87hdyyzj64.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] bu2scf$fp1$2@sea.gmane.org>
References: <[🔎] 1074016130.2107.310.camel@thanatos.hubertnet> <[🔎] bu2scf$fp1$2@sea.gmane.org>

Scripsit Warren Turkal <wt@midsouth.rr.com>

> I think it would be very nice to have some minimal policy in the runlevels
> rather than just making them all the same.

AFAIU the (unwritten) policy is that the multiuser runlevels (2
through 5) are avaliable for the local sysadmin to customize according
to his own particular needs. If packages begin treating them
differently, it may interfere with local customizations.

-- 
Henning Makholm                   "We will discuss your youth another time."

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
  - From: Warren Turkal <wt@midsouth.rr.com>

References:
- Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
  - From: Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>
- Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
  - From: Warren Turkal <wt@midsouth.rr.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Next by Date: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Previous by thread: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Next by thread: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread