[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

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

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