[systemd-devel] thoughts on different command structure

Lennart Poettering lennart at poettering.net
Thu Oct 6 14:21:58 UTC 2016

On Wed, 05.10.16 19:12, Tomasz Torcz (tomek at pipebreaker.pl) wrote:

>   Binaries prefixed with systemd- are either not to be started manually
> (systemd-journald, networkd etc) or not stable/mature enough to be widely
> used – like cgtop, cgls.  The latter kind can be renamed if it
> matured enough - that what happened with systemd-journalctl →
> journalctl.

Oh, it's not about maturity really, whether we call our tools "fooctl"
vs. "systemd-foo". Our current rule in this regard is mostly about
whether something is a primary interface, or bit more exotic. The
primary, major, main interfaces are called "fooctl", the ones that are
a tiny bit less in focus are properly namespaces as "systemd-foo".

A corollary of this is all daemon binaries are called "systemd-foo",
as you would almost never call them as a user.

>   As for /usr/libexec/systemd/systemd … well, maybe it should be called
> systemd-initd from the start.  Now it's too late.

Well, I don't think just "systemd" for PID1 is that bad a choice...

But anyway, I like my bikesheds red.


Lennart Poettering, Red Hat

More information about the systemd-devel mailing list