a note on order of arguements to systemctl command

[Orion Poplawski]

On 08/24/2010 01:53 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 24.08.10 14:59, Matthew Miller (mattdm at mattdm.org) wrote:
>
>> The service command has a syntax like this:
>>
>>   service servicename action
>>
>> where as systemctl has a syntax like this:
>>
>>   systemctl action servicename.service
>>
>> This is inconvienient for the common case where more than one action is
>> performed in sequence on the same service, since with the first ordering,
>> one just hits the up arrow, ctrl-w, and then types the new action (with
>> tab-completion).
>>
>> With the systemctl order, one must first skip back over the first word,
>> which due to the awesome emacsness of bash keybindings is more of a pain.
>>
>> I'm not saying that systemctl's syntax needs to be changed. I am saying,
>> however, that it's important to get the service command working with
>> systemctl so that people can use that instead.
>
> Interesting definition of "important".
>

The semantics of a command you may execute dozens of times a day 
depending on your work environment is "important", especially when it is 
(nearly) functionally equivalent to one you used to use but is now 
somewhat different.  I agree with Matt here, why make it different?

> BTW, there's a systemd-devel mailing list. Must of the stuff discussed
> here should probably discussed there instead.
>
> Lennart
>

I disagree.  This is where systemd is getting presented to the world, 
this is where it will receive the broadest exposure.

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion at cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com