On Sat, 18.06.11 16:39, Aaron Sowry (aaron+rh@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > - The same command outputs column headers on tty, and no headers > > > otherwise. This is inconsistent. If I am outputting to a file, or > > > perhaps a printer, and want headers on my non-tty output, I have to > > > add them myself since there is no flag to force them on non-tty > > > channels. If I don't want them and they are present, I tail. > > > > I am pretty sure that if you ask us nicely, we'll add an option to > > enable headers nonetheless. It's however usually simpler if you pipe > > something not to have to use tail/head. > > Yet another flag to work around inconsistent behaviour is the last thing > systemctl needs. Simplicity is not the issue here - you are assuming that output > piped to something other than a tty is not destined for human eyes. I shouldn't > have to convince you that this is nonsense, and will only get worse if --full is > applied automatically to all non-tty output. Shall we add a --no-full flag to > work around this, too? You know, I'd prefer if you take up your beef with "ls" first. Have you ever compared the output of "ls" and of "ls | cat"? And that's just the most obvious case. Generating slightly different output on a tty than when used in another way is deeply rooted in Linux heritage. Autopaging is just a small step forward in that area. And a very welcome one. In this regard systemd is just following the evolution of Linux. We are not revolutionizing in this area, and we are not pioneering either. > > > - Currently, if I run 'systemctl --all' and have no pager (at least no > > > pager that systemctl knows of) available, I get an error message and > > > no output. This is horribly bad form, and forces me to use > > > --no-pager or pipe to cat in order to get output. This issue is > > > acknowledged in RH bug 713707. > > > > We generally do not support if people delete arbitrary things from their > > installation. /bin/more is part of util-linux, and if you delete that > > then you broke your system, so don't complain to us please. > > It is difficult to concieve where systemd might end up in future. And how does that matter for Fedora? > Is util-linux a systemd dependency? Yes, absolutely. systemd depends on util-linux for the gettys, for fsck, for mount, for umount, for swapoff, for swapon -- all these commands are more than just wrappers around kernel functionality and are pretty much the Linux API for the respective functionality. > > > - Another bright idea (RH bug 713567) is that --full should be applied > > > to non-tty output automatically, and not to tty output. > > > > Yes, it actually makes sense and has been requested which is why we > > implemented it. > > This is being implemented now? Hmm? Implicit --full when using a pager has been the default since quite some time in systemd. > > > No other Linux/UNIX tools make this assumption (with > > > perhaps the exception of git-log et. al.), and if you are wanting > > > administrators to feel comfortable with your new soon-to-be-ubiquitous > > > tools, then I suggest you try to be consistent with existing > > > convention. > > > > I think you are mixing up "administrators" with "Aaron Sowry". > > Not really. All other administrators use exactly the same tools I do, very few > of which behave like systemctl. Having to deal with command-specific behaviour > only makes it more difficult to learn a new tool. Yupp, as I see it it eases an administrator's life. I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this, and leave it at this. Sorry if that is disappointing. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
