On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 01:29 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: [long comparsion elided...] > Or to explain this with a table, showing you what verbs most people > would probably use for four kinds (of the ten) of objects that are > managed by systemd: > > Services: Started | Stopped > Socket: Bound | Unbound > Devices: Plugged In | Plugged Out > Mounts: Mounted | Unmounted > > And we noticed that, and when we looked for more abstract terms that > could cover all three cases, we cam up with this: > > Units: Active | Inactive > Hey Lennart, instead of going all defensive here, I think it would be good to simply acknowledge that we are currently missing a 'friendly introduction to systemd' targeting sysadmins (or even regular users). The paragraph I cited above could be a nice start for a section in that document. > Oh, that's really not fair... SysV only covers a tiny fraction of what > Upstart cover or even systemd cover. > > > - upstart: 19 > > - systemd: 62 > > Well, but the systemd unit files are trivial to understand. If you > honestly claim that the systemd unit files are harder to understand than > shell monsters you find ind /etc/init.d then I'll go and shoot myself. > > Look at the contents of those files. See how tiny they are! Well, I have to agree with notting that the sheer number of them is confusing, and if I look at how tiny they are, it makes me scratch my head even more: e.g. dbus.target: [Unit] Description=D-Bus Whats the point of all these empty targets ? Who are they good for ? My understanding so far was that targets collect groups of units for pure convenience, but this target does not collect anything... -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
