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

Re: X Windows and Gnome Problem - HELP!!



On 2002-11-01 16:49-0500 Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-11-01 at 15:42, Oyvind A. Holm wrote:
> > On 2002-10-30 22:33-0000 Tim Woodward wrote:
> > > If i knew how to bypass X Windows upon boot-up i could re-run the
> > > XF86Config which may solve the problem. Can anyone help me sort
> > > it?
> >
> > If you want to avoid getting into X at boot time, you can edit
> > /etc/inittab and set the line containing “initdefault” to this:
> >
> > id:3:initdefault:
> >
> > This will ensure you enter multiuser text mode when you reboot.
>
> Why do we keep getting this answer on Debian-User? That is the Red Hat
> situation - on Debian, by default runlevels 2 through 5 are essentially
> identical, subject to sysop configuration otherwise. The one exception
> is that runlevels 4 and 5 don't spawn virtual consoles on screens 3-6 -
> otherwise, all the same daemons are launched on systems not otherwise
> reconfigured.

Ahhh.... In fact — this very example I was referring to was a change
in /etc/inittab only eight days after I changed from Red Hat 6.1 to
Debian 2.2r3, so you’re absolutely correct. I found the change
described in my CVS log for that file and it made sense at that time.
Seems as it’s only an old habit from the RH days which didn’t have any
effect at all. ☺ Well, well.

    Regards,         ~                                              +--------,
    Øyvind         _~              +        )        +      '       |/ _      \
  ,_______________| |______   ,                  ,           .        (~)  + +
 /________________________/\         .      *           +        `     U    *
 | http://www.sunbase.org ||                                            `.
+------------------------------------------------------------------_      (o_.'
| OpenPGP: 0x629022EB 2002-02-24 Øyvind A. Holm <sunny@sunbase.org> -_    //\
| Fingerprint: DBE9 8D44 67F7 42AC 2CA1 -- 7651 724E 9D53 6290 22EB   -_  V_/_
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: