why do we use systemd?

[poma]

On 06.07.2014 15:21, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-07-05 at 22:07 -0400, Garry T. Williams wrote:
>> The systemd(1) manual page uses the term "entity" -- not object to
>> refer to units.  And it says units encapsulate various objects.
>> Perhaps this is the source of confusion?
>
> The word "entity" is not used anywhere in the systemd(1) man page. The
> plural "entities" is used exactly once, in the phrase "systemd provides
> a dependency system between various entities called "units" of 12
> different types". So apparently entity==unit.
>
> The term "object" is used twice. Once is in reference to "file system
> objects" which I assume has the usual meaning. The other is in "Units
> encapsulate various objects that are relevant for system boot-up and
> maintenance".
>
> So to sum up: systemd manages dependency relations between entities
> called units. Units encapsulate objects in 12 different ways. Objects
> are <insert hand-waving here>
>
> I repeat that I am not attacking systemd here, I'm criticizing the way
> it's described. It may seem perfectly clear to those who already
> understand it, but it's not at all clear to those who are used to
> something different.
>
> poc
>

You can propose your terminology.


poma