On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:18 AM, Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at 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.