On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 02:03:27PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: > On Monday 29 August 2005 02:42, Brendan O'Dea wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 04:09:46AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: > > Debian doesn't enforce a policy on the multi-user run-levels (2-5), this > > is the decision of the local administrator. > > I agree that not enforcing a policy on run-levels is fine, the admin should > always be able to change them as he see fits. > > but is there really any good reason to have the default run-level states > differ from the LSB defined init-level states [1]? Is there any good reason for changing them from their current one? "Because the LSB says so" is not a reasonable answer; Debian is not an LSB system. We use Debian packages and not LSB ones, for starters. And the spec clearly says that these numbers are just for arguments to the install_initd LSB command, not application use. Our install_initd, assuming the LSB compatibility stuff has one, can simply remap them. Our defaults are certainly easier to understand and remember. They have clearly defined, non-vague meanings. The LSB ones are highly subjective and serve only to validate redhat. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature