Re: CentOS-6 Status updates

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



On 06/16/2011 12:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 6/16/2011 10:43 AM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

        
runlevels, traditionally, have not been defined (although the LSB has
In Linux? I mean, runlevel 3 was multi-user text mode as far back as Sun
OS - I can remember putting things into 3, because X would
while () {
   crash
   respawn
}
Originally runlevel 2 was multiuser, 3 was multiuser with networking and 
network daemons.  Without serial terminals, that wouldn't make a lot of 
sense...

On System V and Solaris runlevel 5 is halt so you might get a nasty
surprise if you were expecting X11!
I think adding 5 for X was a Linux kludge.  And in the original sysV 
design, I believe each runlevel was executed in sequence up and down. 
That is, everything started in runlevel 1 and 2 started on the way to 3 
and could be sequenced properly that way instead of jumping directly to 
3 or 5 and having to have everything specified to start there.

No. I worked with both SCO and ISC linux in the late 80's and early 90's and run level 5 was used for X. In fact I think
it was used also in DGUX for X.


--
Stephen Clark
NetWolves
Sr. Software Engineer III
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.clark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netwolves.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux