I think the previous post mentions the `service` command, which has `service foo start` pattern.
I'm used to `service` command, so I have muscle memory which `systemd` breaks. The way `systemd` commands are laid out is better, it just messes with `service` command muscle memory.
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.
The 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.
Many distros still provide the `service` command, and don't print any warnings when you use it. At best, you might get an informational message that the equivalent systemd command is being called. There is no recommendation to call the systemd command directly, or any sign of the `service` command being deprecated any time soon. As a result, a lot of people are probably still relying on their muscle memory for the `service` command.
I'm used to `service` command, so I have muscle memory which `systemd` breaks. The way `systemd` commands are laid out is better, it just messes with `service` command muscle memory.