NVidia Debian thread

[David Bandel]

On 1/31/07, C M Reinehr <cmr at amsent.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 January 2007 10:29, Michael Hipp wrote:
> > C M Reinehr wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 30 January 2007 12:16, Ric Moore wrote:
> > >> On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 11:29 -0600, C M Reinehr wrote:
> > >>>   I wouldn't say that it ignores run levels, just that it has a slightly
> > >>> different way of organizing them (as it does many other facets of
> > >>> Linux). Run level 0 = full stop, run level 1 = single user, run level 2
> > >>> = multi-user & run level 6 = reboot. IANAE but I think the only real
> > >>> difference, here, is that using run levels of 3, 4 or 5 is left to the
> > >>> discretion of the user. IIRC this is quite similar to COL except that
> > >>> COL didn't start the X-server until run level 3 or 4, but I could be
> > >>> mistaken.
> > >>
> > >> Is there an LSB stance on this?? I'm used to runlevel 3 being text mode
> > >> and runlevel 5 being X and 6 for shutdown to reboot. Go figure. Ric
> > >
> > > There is:
> > >
> > > http://refspecs.freestandards.org/LSB_3.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-gen
> > >eric/runlevels.html
> > >
> > >   0  halt
> > >   1  single user mode
> > >   2  multiuser with no network services exported
> > >   3  normal/full multiuser
> > >   4  reserved for local use, default is normal/full multiuser
> > >   5  multiuser with a display manager or equivalent
> > >   6  reboot
> > >   Note: These run levels were chosen as reflecting the most frequent
> > > existing practice, and in the absence of other considerations,
> > > implementors are strongly encouraged to follow this convention to provide
> > > consistency for system administrators who need to work with multiple
> > > distributions.
> > >
> > > It seems that, in general, Debian conforms with the LSB. From the Debian
> > > Reference Manual:
> >
> > I don't see how you can say that. On Debian systems 2-5 are identical where
> > they are not in the LSB. Debian starts in RL2 and has *everything* running
> > there, including the display manager. But that's not what the LSB seems to
> > call for.
> >
> > Caveat: I'm going mostly by what my Ubuntu systems do, I assume it's
> > directly copied from Debian.
> >
> > Michael
>
> I guess it depends upon your interpretation of "in general". :-)
>
> The overall architecture of the system initialization and the organization of
> Debian  init scripts & run levels conforms to the LSB. The only place that
> they differ from the LSB, that I have seen, is in their definition of run
> levels 2 though 5. I have no idea why they choose to differ in this respect,
> but per the note, this is permissible but not encouraged.
>

In 1995(?), when I had Slackware, Caldera Desktop Preview 1, and
Debian running, Debian used runlevel 2 for all but maintenance.
They've been nothing if not consistent since then.  I suspect they see
no good reason to change, and thousands of admins used to runlevel 2
for Debian over the years as the reason not to.

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
            - Nemesis Air Racing Team motto