Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:27:53 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DEVFS permissions &c. Message-ID: <199701121927.MAA25990@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Mutt.19970112181120.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Jan 12, 97 06:11:20 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > And please - PLEASE - no "runlevels"! > > Yeah. Actually, we do already have runlevels: S, 0, [234] (depending > on the actual SysV vendor), and 6. :-) > > But i agree that extending this to more runlevels is useless. I have > yet to see a single SysV implementation that groks all runlevel > transitions without silly actions like starting up subsystems if you > lower the runlevel etc. That is because they are not truly runlevels, they are runstates, with concordant service configuration lists. There as *some* attempt to use them as levels (0 = single user, 1 = multiuser, 2 = networking enabled, 3 = exported services enabled, 6 = shutdown) in many SVR3/SVR4 implementations... only 6 violates the level ordering, really. 4 and 5 were reserved for user defined system and service activation above and betond the system stuff. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701121927.MAA25990>