Re: PROPOSAL: defining a new runlevel, 4
I agree as well.
I've a question. What are the `on demand' runlevels meant to be used
for? (the a b c runlevels you can `telinit')? Is anyone using them
for anything? What? I'd like to hear about it.
Could they be used for bringing networking up and down? Or should
they be left for local configuration? What if we decide to use
them... how difficult would it be to add a few more on demand
runlevels like that to init, to leave for local configurations?
0 - reboot
1 - Single User (sulogin)
2 - Local mode, no net, no X, 2 VC's, with `kbd request' bound to:
# Action on special keypress (ALT-UpArrow).[1]
kb::kbrequest:/bin/open -su
3 - Networked, start servers etc...
4 - XDM and networked?
5 - ? The `armadillo book' says that runlevel 5 is a `firmware
state', if I remember right...[2] We don't need that.
hmm...
a - start networking
b - stop networking
c - ?
4 - Local only, no net, XDM
5 - XDM + Networked.
... ppp doesn't count as networked? Or does it? ppp always on might
be, but `diald' might not... though the anti-spoof ipfwadm stuff
should be run always, anytime a net link is going to be made.
Footnotes:
[1] This is supported in the /etc/kbd/default.map I'm using, which is
the m4 output of the `hypermap.m4' from the kbd package.
[2] I sold the book back for groceries a couple months ago.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: