[clug] Runlevel 5 vs 3 and startx
Peter Barker
pbarker at barker.dropbear.id.au
Thu Nov 24 23:56:57 GMT 2005
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Michael James wrote:
> So it IS old-fashioned keeping servers at runlevel 3.
OK, so I'm old fashioned ;)
My servers run at runlevel 2, but I guess what we're really discussing is
"running X or not".
I prefer "not". Some of the servers are in China. Not much point having a
graphical console when I'm in Canberra...
Running X also pokes the video hardware in ways that servers don't
require.
For the paranoid-about-blackhats type of person, you're still running
stuff you don't need to - it's really up to preference as to where the
risk/benefit analysis falls.
> michaelj
Yours,
--
Peter Barker | N _--_|\ /---- Barham, Vic
Programmer,Sysadmin,Geek | W + E / /\
pbarker at barker.dropbear.id.au | S \_,--?_*<-- Canberra
You need a bigger hammer. | v [35S, 149E]
"Peter is apathetic, and I'm vaguely apathetic" -- Rachel, thinking of organising a movie trip
More information about the linux
mailing list