Re: omg : man lb_config :)

[Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl>]

( This reply to the whole mailinglist
 is to show respect to Ben Armstrong )

Op 20101012 om 03:29 schreef Vitaly:
> ?? ??????, 11/10/2010 ?? 20:49 -0300, Ben Armstrong ??????????:
> > I don't need to.
> 
> ??xperience - the source of knowledge :)
> 
> > If you would like to come straight out and say what you think the
> > problem is (*after* you have fixed your incorrect usage of 'man',
> > please) then maybe we can help. 
> 
> Amusingly

The amusement that I saw,
was that Ben Armstrong took the effort to help.

> > But just waving incorrect commands
> > at us madly certainly isn't helping to communicate what you think
> > the problem is.
> 
> How can you help me if you can not see the obvious ?


Vitaly,


It is up to you to elaborate what you would like to ask.

That is because your mom is not here. Here we expect that
one does try to go forward with the group. So when there is the advice
that

   man lh config

will try to show the manual page of two commands ( 'lh' and 'config' )
then take that advice. Your mom would have say that you must type

   man lh_config


And as your mom is not here, you have to adapt to a higher level.
Take time to explain what looks strange to you.


Seeing three postings with
  > testing: man lh config
  > sid: man lb config
without progress, is for me the signal to ignore the poster.


Vitaly it is your turn to make the next step.


Groeten
Geert Stappers