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

> Can we collaborate about it?

Okay - but I don't see much left for me to help with.

[...]
>> 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".
> 
> I believe that changing the names are far fetching, since they were get 
> used to by a lot of users. I think they will not accpet it. I also believe 
> that small, to the point, fixes are more managable for them.

Yes, I meant to imply that it must be okay to describe these utilities
as "controlling" things *because* that is a permanent part of all
their names.
 
>> The bugreports would only be priority "wishlist", though.
> 
> Since the public upstream repository is at github, I headed there. Do you 
> think filing a debian bug is a better approach?

I'm used to this list being used to coordinate changes that are going
through Debian channels, but if you're happy to go straight to
upstream that's probably a good idea.

> What do you think of
> https://github.com/ZjYwMj/systemd/compare/systemd:systemd:main...man-pages-fixes
> ?

It looks like a sensible minimal fix.  You could miss out the commas
in "query, or modify," but it's fine either way.

(To me the most baffling of the systemd -ctl commands is busctl, but
if the intended users of busctl are developers who are trying to debug
software communicating over DBus then perhaps it all makes sense to
them.)