3 Feb
2016
3 Feb
'16
8:52 p.m.
On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:18 AM, Gordon Messmer gordon.messmer@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/03/2016 08:59 AM, Warren Young wrote:
Again, I don’t know why they couldn’t just do it with links.
Probably because they want to support a read-only root filesystem, working toward "stateless" systems.
How does that explain anything? The same RPM that installed the service file can create a hard link or symlink giving the command an alternate name.