[ale] Ubuntu upgrade

[drifter]

Still fighting this and having problems as my Linux background (shallow as 
it is) is Red Hat, not Debian.

This netbook upgraded to Ubuntu 10.04 LTS.
It starts up in runlevel 3 -- at least that's what I think it is.
All I get is a (root) prompt. if I type "startx" [Ent] after logging in, 
the hard drive churns for a few seconds and my desktop appears.
There is no /etc/inittab file.

Ubuntu is >supposed< to be the "easy to use" Linux distro that doesn't
do STUPID things like this.  Anyone coming from Windoze would have no
clue what was wrong or how to fix it.

I, at least, know that somewhere I have to add the command "startx."
I just do not know what file I need to edit, or where it might be hidden.
It doesn't seem to be in /boot or /boot/grub.

Sean

PS  The file /boot/grub/menu.lst has the following after the list
of default options:

title       Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, kernel 2.6.32-23-generic
uuid       1866e268-96e3-4aaf-b727-b66140d931a3
kernel   /vmlinuz-2.6.32-23-generic root=UUID=99b3c22....ro
quiet splash
initrd     /initrd.img-2.6.32.23-generic
quiet

This is followed by the same kernel (recovery mode) followed by four more
pairs of kernel entries ending up with 2.6.28-15.
Should the last line in the block above be "startx"?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Sunday 04 July 2010 19:53:38 Brian Pitts wrote:
> On 07/04/2010 06:43 PM, drifter wrote:
> > Okay; I upgraded the Ubuntu install on my netbook from 9.whatever
> > to 10.whatever.
> > Apparently I now need to edit the grub boot menu as the OS now boots
> > into runlevel 3. On Fedora/RedHat the runlevel used to be set in
> > /etc/inittab  but there doesn't seem to be any such file on this box.
> >
> > So how do I get to the grub boot file to edit it to start in Runlevel
> > 5 and, if necessary, tell it to startX?
> 
> Runlevels 2-5 are the same in Ubuntu and probably most other
> Debian-derived distributions. I just checked a working Ubuntu 10.04
> desktop and it is at runlevel 2.
> 
> So, I don't think the runlevel is your problem.
>