David Scheidt wrote:
>
> What's wrong with run with system V runlevels? Other than it's system V and
> everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.
They try to map graphs into a line.
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
who is as social as a wampas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTEC
> On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 01:22:46AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
>
> > runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different
> > system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"? The
> > advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of
> > UNIX with a BSD heri
On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 01:22:46AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
> runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different
> system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"? The
> advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of
> UNIX with a BSD heritage.
Can
David Scheidt wrote:
> What's wrong with run with system V runlevels? Other than it's system V and
> everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.
Well, the one danger is that we'd be slowly drifting away from
the classic BSD way of doing thigs. Of course, the official BSD
is dead (right?). But
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dav
> id Scheidt writes:
> >What's wrong with run with system V runlevels? Other than it's system V and
> >everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.
>
> runlevels are a very oldfashioned way to think about thing
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dav
id Scheidt writes:
>On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>>
>> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init
>> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to kee
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>
> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init
> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep
> important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, sysl
