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

Re: And now for something completely different... etch!

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 01:03:12AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> > - inetd begone! -> xinetd (better mechanism to control DoS, privilege
> >   separation, etc.)
> xinetd begone. There is no justification for using anything resembling
> inetd on a modern system.

Easy setting of a stunnel?

> > - Separate runlevels: 2 for multi, no net, 3 for multi no X, 4 for X, 4=5
> No way. Debian has always avoided mindlessly dictating what runlevels
> must be used for. There's no reason to destroy this feature now. And
> there's no advantage to consuming an entire runlevel just to say
> "/etc/init.d/xdm stop" or "/etc/init.d/networking stop", which is
> all that you are proposing.

Still, better have init 2 than having to hack the boot command line to set
init=/bin/bash, having to remount in rw and editing whatever you fucked up,
before all the services go up and people start login into your server.

Jesus Climent                                      info:www.pumuki.org
Unix SysAdm|Linux User #66350|Debian Developer|2.6.10|Helsinki Finland
GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429  7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69

Where are you going, Starfish and Friends?
		--Chad (Charlie's Angels)

Reply to: