Re: more real runlevels?
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > I would like to run the system without xdm most of the time, but there
> > are times when I need it. Also sometimes I want to switch off network
> > services but still allow local logins.
> >
> mee too. i must admit, that this is a point, where suse and redhat are
> better than debian. :'-(
>
Well, how about a bit of reasonableness here guys?
One: Debian provides a well integrated set of run levels and provides ways
for system administrators to modify the run level behavior to meet specific
and particular needs. If you like Red Hat's method better than Debian's
that is certainly your choice, but lets be a bit more realistic in our
comparisons.
Two: The LSB is a good thing. I, personally, am heavily involved in this
specification process. But demanding that any distribution follow a "work
in progress" based on the fact that discussions have occurred and a working
specification is written does a grave dis-service to both Debian and the
LSB. This standard has not yet been release. It would not be prudent to
begin following such a moving target at this time. There will be plenty of
time for Debian to conform to this standard once it is, indeed, a
standard. Until then it is probably better to simply worry over the way
that Debian _does_ this and how you deal with the problems it presents.
Discussions like this could put the particulars of the proposed standard
in better focus for implementation, and could also show up any potential
pitfalls in the current proposal.
Beyond that, I must say that I am not an expert on these issues and rely
on others to explain the ramifications of the various choices, so I would
welcome an informed discussion ;-)
Luck,
Dwarf
Reply to: