On Fri, 22.02.13 13:37, Dennis Semakin ([email protected]) wrote: > Hello everybody. > Hi Lennart. > > Since I was watching and looking at the diagrams which is building by my > application... it shows > the depending of any objects to each other. > I catch myself for one though... > systemd's units build some bounds, like a humans. > I mean each of us can be 'WantsBy' somebody > can be 'Conflict', can be 'Wants' by someone, > can be 'Require'... all of us have the 'Target's... and so on. > > It look like human relationships... I think. > > Q: What was your philosophy when you start to think about systemd?
Our dependency vocabulary is based on the vocabulary already established by package managers for inter-package dependencies, as well as the vocabulary already in use by other init systems for inter-service dependencies. There's where little of our own creativity in the naming of these dependency types. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
