> There's no way to attach a name to a group of processes, in a hierarchal, secure way. And you cannot emulate this.
One could require that administrators should create private users for daemons if they wanted to be able to shoot them down reliably. Not saying you should have gone this way, just that it would be another way of handling it.
> Device management is fundamentally different on all OSes, you get very very different semantics.
Yes, that can be a lot of fun.
Am I right though in thinking that the interfaces through which processes higher up in the stack communicate with systemd are normal DBus ones on the whole? If so then portability issues caused by software on Linux depending on systemd (I mean GNOME panel-like software) could presumably also be solved by making native infrastructure on the target system present those interfaces too.