why do we use systemd?

[David Benfell]

Patrick O'Callaghan writes:
>
> 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".

Sorry, even your attempt to parse this (and it's a valiant effort) yields  
what, for me, is gobbledygook. And yes, this is one of the things that  
makes me unhappy with systemd.

*What*, for example, is "the usual meaning" of "file system objects?" A  
file? Why not just say "file?" And if the documentation really means files  
or pipes or devices, then why not say "files or pipes or devices?"

This kind of verbiage simply adds an additional layer of abstraction that  
removes the text ever farther from whatever it's talking about and reduces  
comprehensibility.

-- 
David Benfell
See https://parts-unknown.org/node/2 if you do not understand the  
attachment.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140706/132807a4/attachment-0001.sig>