Re: runlevels remodeled
Scripsit Timo Aaltonen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> Given that it is very rare for machines these days to have banks of
>> local ttys attached, is a "multi-user without network" runlevel really
>> relevant for even a significant minory of our users? How would those
>> multiple users interact with the machine?
> Well, I've given some thought on what LSB means by "multiuser with no
> network services exported", and I believe it means that network is up,
> but no network services are yet started. This is how Redhat works
Still, without any network services started it will be difficult for
the multiple users to interact with the box. No sshd, no telnetd, etc
... how do the multiple users get in?
> I admit that a machine without network is of little use, but one
> that you can be certain does not have any open ports is in some
> scenarios useful..
I agree that it could be useful for maintenance situations where one
wants apt-get to be able to download stuff. But it sounds like "single
user with network" would be a more honest description than "multi-user
without network services".
Henning Makholm "Hele toget raslede imens Sjælland fór forbi."