systemctl disable/mask
On 28 Sep 2014 04:35:03 +0200, lee <lee@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
>
> Anyway, it gives me to think that such a misunderstanding has come
> up to begin with and that it hasn't been fixed long ago. Someone who
> doesn't understand what "disabled" means is programming an init
> system: What other misunderstandings might have gone into it? Why
> obfuscate things and mislead and confuse the users?
I was scrolling last night through the debian-user@ archives, looking
for a non-systemd thread, and clicked on this post [1] through a
fat-fingered error. (I unsubscribed a few weeks ago because a group of
anti-systemd trolls have hijacked the list and are spamming it with
BS.)
You're angered by the fact that the systemd developers have chosen
"systemctl disable service" to mean "disable at boot" and "systemctl
mask service" to mean "disable completely".
Since you use both Debian and Fedora, have you ranted or filed a bug
about the fact that:
- "apt-get update" means "update the local cache" and "yum update"
means "update the local cache and upgrade all the packages to their
latest versions"
- "apt-get update" and "yum makecache" both mean "update the local cache"
- "apt-get dist-upgrade" means "upgrade all the packages to their
latest versions" and is therefore more less equivalent to "yum update"
(if you pre-run "yum makecache", "apt-get dist-upgrade" and "yum -C
update" are equivalent)
- "apt-get upgrade" doesn't have a Fedora equivalent
- "apt-get dist-upgrade" could be considered ambiguous, it could mean
"upgrade to the latest version of the distro" or "upgrade to the next
version of a distro" (perhaps you could suggest "apt-get
release-upgrade" for the latter so as to avoid this ambiguity...)
Furthermore, the MO that the systemd developers have chosen has a
precedent. In "/etc/modprobe.conf" and "/etc/modprobe.d/":
- if you use "blacklist module", the module won't be loaded but it can
be loaded manually or as a dependency
- if you use "install module /bin/true" that module won't be loaded at all
Have you ranted or filed a bug about this because, to paraphrase you,
the modprobe developers don't know what "blacklist" means?
I can understand that some people dislike systemd but complaints like
this one weaken their already-weak case and make the anti-systemd
whiners look like a bunch of clueless lunatics.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/09/msg02105.html
Reply to: