[21:39] anyone around for a (hopefully) easy question? [21:42] well.... i'll just throw it out here, in hopes that someone takes note. :) [21:42] i'm using upstart inside a xen domU [21:42] (aside: works great, very happy with it) [21:43] however, i've noticed something wierd when using the "console output" stanza [21:44] if the script runs during the startup phase (ie, "start on startup") then everything works great [21:45] if i switch to runlevel 2 (by calling /sbin/runlevel --set=2) then i start getting the "staircase effect" for anything starting up afterwards [21:45] i've tried setting "stty onclr", but it doesn't work. (capturing the output of stty -a shows that the setting has been set) [21:46] obviously, this is just a nit-picky display issue since there is no functional problem with upstart running [21:46] but i was hoping someone had an idea of something else i could try [21:47] i can run "tput hpa 0" to reset the line to the left everytime before i echo something out, but that only works for things i intentionall echo [21:48] STDERR output still ends up with the staircase effect [21:48] any ideas? [21:48] brendan_: perhaps it is a tty that gets started on runlevel 2 , the replacement inits do grep /etc/inittab and do perform kinky actions [21:49] would upstart itself be doing that behind the scenes? [21:50] yes, can be [21:51] the only scripts upstart is running are the ones i've placed in event.d - the ones that call external scripts in init.d have all been replaced [21:53] in that case I guess not. I have no idea :p [21:53] heh. drat [21:55] but apparently you do use the "compatible" scripts. As I understand it "runlevel" really is a system v scripts [21:56] is there a better way to switch the runlevel? [21:57] or is the idea that runlevels will disappear completely with upstart eventually? [21:57] the whole concept of runlevels as numbers is "system 5 init" [21:57] brendan_: I am not a developer of upstart so I can not say [21:57] but yes. the idea is to let event perform the right actions [21:58] kreesj: ah. thanks