3 ms·
>you need to know the proper systemctl incantation Isn't this true for all commandline programs? It's a different way to do things in many ways, but this argu
by jethro_tell 12y ago
>you need to know the proper systemctl incantation
Isn't this true for all commandline programs? It's a different way to do things in many ways, but this argument doesn't really talk about the merits or pitfalls, only the fact that it's different.
- falcolas 12y agoWell, it's both different and inconsistent. I still have to use netstat for processes who manage their own sockets, but I can't rely on the output for all processes anymore. Also, netstat has existed and worked for more years than I've been a sysadmin. I'm not opposed to learning new things, but this magnitude of change and inconsistency is hard to keep up with.
- EmanueleAina 12y agoBut `netstat` was already broken for xinetd-started services. I get that it probably didn't affect you, but it means that `netstat` already had its shortcomings. Now that socket-activated services may see more widespread usage, hopefully someone interested will add to `netstat` the ability to tell who is listening on the socket and not only who opened it (all the data is available in /proc, which netstat is using already). And in the meantime there's always `systemctl list-sockets`.