From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AE71381F3 for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 23:48:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1D12DE0C1D; Sun, 26 May 2013 23:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FA9EE0BD3 for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 23:47:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Nyx.local (dynamic-adsl-84-220-77-8.clienti.tiscali.it [84.220.77.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: lu_zero) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF03033E01D for ; Sun, 26 May 2013 23:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <51A29F25.1020601@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 01:47:49 +0200 From: Luca Barbato User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:22.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/22.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] eselect init References: <51A08A68.3020900@gentoo.org> <20130526084332.1a8afa69@gentoo.org> <51A1DC0C.2070706@gentoo.org> <20130526164106.GA21548@linux1> <20130526164830.GB21548@linux1> <20130526185545.77a2d6e3@gentoo.org> <20130526225813.GA22273@linux1> In-Reply-To: <20130526225813.GA22273@linux1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 41f9d61c-fe24-417e-9dc2-fbb223db8cbf X-Archives-Hash: 699966034e0078f37e887a7dc5f06bcd On 5/27/13 12:58 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > From what I just read, the difference is that busybox init ignores the > runlevels specified in sysvinit inittab. Nope, it interprets the numbers in a different way. > If that's the only difference, do we really need to modify the inittab > at all? Yes, I tested it first and got the whole system unworkable, one single mode later I baked something to get at least the minimal functionality, supporting our xdm script properly required some more effort I hadn't time to pour that day. lu