3 ms·
I disagree that the way systemd is laid out is better. With initV, issuing many command in sequence to the same service (enable, then start… stop then start… e
by cassianoleal 2y ago
I disagree that the way systemd is laid out is better.
With initV, issuing many command in sequence to the same service (enable, then start… stop then start… etc) is much quicker and easier as it’s “up-arrow, control-W, type new command. With the systemd option I either need to navigate one word to the left (or more depending on how the shell is configured wrt word separation) before I replace the command, or I need to delete both the command and the service name, and retype more.
It’s not a huge difference but small downgrades in ergonomics add up over time.
- egberts1 2y agoA huge typing pain. A backward step in intuitive CLI usage. We can be such a fuddy-duddy gray-beards.
- noumuon 2y agoAliases
- ecef9-8c0f-4374 2y agoduct tape
- egberts1 2y agosuperglue
- BenjiWiebe 2y agoSystemd does have 'restart' and 'enable --now' (which starts the service too). Too bad it doesn't have a '--status 2' flag to show the status after two seconds too.
- dralley 2y agoThe systemd layout allows you to send the same command to multiple services, which is much more frequently useful than sending multiple commands to one service.
- cassianoleal 2y agoI can't remember the last time I had to send the same command to multiple services/units. Normally when I'm doing things on the terminal, I do one thing at a time.