On 2009-08-30 20:29 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > I did an archive white collecting of runlevel settings, and wanted to > share it with you. :) > > First the start runlevel settings: > > * 1 # default-start: 2 3 4 5 s
Only a cosmetic problem, or is this really different from "s 2 3 4 5"? > * 1 # default-start: s 1 2 3 4 5 > 2 # default-start: 1 Those two are killprocs and single, shipped in initscripts. > * 4 # default-start: 2 > * 5 # default-start: 3 4 5 > * 5 # default-start: 3 5 > * 7 # default-start: s 2 3 4 5 > * 8 # default-start: 1 2 3 4 5 > * 14 # default-start: 2 3 5 > 17 # default-start: > 112 # default-start: s > 795 # default-start: 2 3 4 5 > > Next the stop runlevel settings: > > * 1 # default-stop: 0 1 4 6 > * 2 # default-stop: 0 One of these is initscripts' halt, who is the other suspect? > * 3 # default-stop: 6 Again, one of these is initscripts' reboot. > * 8 # default-stop: 0 1 2 6 > 55 # default-stop: 1 > * 77 # default-stop: 0 6 > * 116 # default-stop: > 709 # default-stop: 0 1 6 > > I flagged the ones I suspect are buggy with (*). Some of them are > already reported to the BTS. A bit surprised so many scripts is > lacking stop runleve info, I must admit. Many of those 112 scripts started in runlevel S (and some of the others) may not need to ever be stopped because they do not start a daemon -- sudo comes to mind as an example. However, 77 scripts which stop in runlevels 0 and 6 but not in 1 looks like a lot of crap. Sven _______________________________________________ initscripts-ng-devel mailing list initscripts-ng-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/initscripts-ng-devel