Re: Doesn't introspection limited to passive examination, withoutactions?

[email protected] wrote:
> Refering to 
> https://manpages.debian.org/bullseye/systemd/networkctl.1.en.html .
> The DESCRIPTION section of the networkctl manual page, at the top of the 
> page, writes about introspection. Does introspection correctly describes 
> actions such as delete, up, down, reconfigure, reload? Those actions are
> mentioned as possible commands at the COMMANDS section. 
> Can someone who read only the DESCRIPTION assume networkctl only offers 
> a simple dump of the network interface states?

I think you're right; the synopsis

 networkctl - Query the status of network links

is also misleading, and should at least say "query or modify" - more
probably just "control".

There's no good reason for networkctl(1) to mention the word
"introspection" at all; that word is used these days as a technical
term for something unrelated.  What "networkctl status" does isn't
even introspection in the normal non-jargon sense, since it doesn't
check anything internal to networkctl itself, it reports the status of
the machine's network interfaces (even if they're all managed by
ifupdown).

Manpages for other utilities in the systemd -ctl family say:

 bootctl - Control EFI firmware boot settings and manage boot loader
 busctl - Introspect the bus
 hostnamectl - Control the system hostname
 journalctl - Query the systemd journal
 localectl - Control the system locale and keyboard layout settings
 loginctl - Control the systemd login manager
 systemctl - Control the systemd system and service manager
 timedatectl - Control the system time and date

I would suggest that busctl, journalctl, and networkctl should all
standardise on "Control" (if it isn't accurate, they're misnamed!),
and they should especially avoid adding redundant extra syllables to
the word "inspect".

The bugreports would only be priority "wishlist", though.