on Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 02:30:26AM +0200, Wesley J. Landaker wrote about Re: And now for something completely different... etch!: > I don't often customize runlevels very much, but usually the first thing > I > do when I install a Debian system is remove all the xdm's from 2 and 3 > and > add them to 5. I switch between those all the time on systems that are
The first thing I do after installing xdm is often (not on single workstations) disabling the startup of the X server because the machine running xdm is a central application server i.e. client workstations start X with -query / ... to get a login on the application server. I don't want an X server running on the application server so I change xdm's default configuration. I want to start an X server on the client, so I create a startup script to start the X server in a non conventional way. Currently, the runlevel indicates which things are started and these things can be anything. I consider it a nice and flexible abstraction. The proposal however, indicates that a runlevel would be dedicated to X. In my setup, this would mean that my application server would have to run in this dedicated X runlevel because xdm happens to be started there. However, this machine doesn't run X at all ... It doesn't seem to feel right i.e. the abstraction is polluted with implementation issues. > mostly lights servers but sometimes need to become desktops on the fly > when > an extra warm body shows up. > > -- > Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094 0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." -- Henry Spencer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]