On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:51:22AM -0500, Rob Owens wrote:
>
> The problem is that the people behind this merge are inexperienced as system
> admins. Being a good programmer does not by itself qualify a person to
> decide on the types of changes they are proposing. You need to be an
> experienced system admin if you are going to make smart changes to the
> underlying layers of an operating system.
>
> This applies to what they are doing with systemd as well. And I can give a
> simple example that illustrates the inexperience of the systemd architect(s):
>
> If I want to stop a service, then do some operation (edit a config file,
> perhaps), then start that service, I need to run the following commands:
>
> systemctl stop someservice
> vi someservice.cfg
> systemctl start someservice
>
> The systemctl syntax are in nice English language order. It sounds like a
> sentence. But it is backwards if you consider the steps a sysadmin would
> take to type them:
>
> systemctl stop someservice
> <up arrow for bash history>
> <cursor back 12 spaces>
> <backspace 4 spaces to erase "stop">
> start
> <enter>
>
> Or just re-type the whole line -- it's probably quicker.
>
> If they had done it right:
>
> systemctl someservice stop
> <up arrow for bash history>
> <backspace 4 spaces>
> start
> <enter>
>
> An experienced sysadmin who has to do this type of thing several times a
> day would have designed this syntax for ease of use. The systemd
> developers did not do this, presumably because they do not have to type
> these commands several times a day.

I would normally have edited the configuration file andd *then* sent a
sighup. /etc/init.d/someservice restart.

Is there some reason, som
e corner case, why what I'm doing is wrong?
Aside from not using systemd, of course.

-- hendrik