Re: Re: Packages with unusable documentation
Le Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:35:03 -0400, Dominic Amann a écrit :
>>
>>
>>On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 10:35:32AM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
>>> To solve my mkinitrd problem I searched for solutions. Each time someone
>>> has run into my problem he was asked if module-init-tools are installed
>>> and each time it was answered yes. Unfortunately also each time no
>>> further action is mentioned.
>>>
>>> I looked into module-init-tools to find out what's doing. First I tried
>>> "man module-init-tools" which didn't work. Second I looked into
>>> "/usr/share/doc/module-init-tools" just to discover there is just
>>> useless common facts. Third I started dselect and read the package
>>> description which didn't help further.
>>
>>How about this simple pipe
>>
>> dpkg -L PACKAGE | egrep '^/usr/share/(info|man)/'
>>
>>as a starting point?
>>
hum this is overkill. Install dwww (need an apache install) that s the
best we have in debian until now.
> Tragically, here I am in April 2005 with essentially the same problem,
> and the same shortage of information. I basically lucked into this
> discussion thread via google. I honestly can't see the viability of the
> replies given to Otto Wyss. There _is_ a documentation problem. Packages
> don't have an easy (end user) way to list what is in the package, or a
> standard for useful overview or mechanisms. To shout him down, and then
> to provide (admittedly useful, but certainly not end-user friendly) info
> is counter productive. Sure he came off a little as telling package
> maintainers what to do. Sure, his suggestion (which places him in the
> top 1% of complainers) does not fit in to the carefully considered
> packaging strategy being adhered to by you all.
the best service to look in packages i packages.debian.org . Or again
dwww.
> I have yet to find out, for example which files I need to fiddle with to
> fix my autoloading problem of certain modules. I need a debian specific
> overview of where to put my device specific 'aliases' and 'options',
> especially since some packages I am playing with are not debian
> friendly, or were designed for prior kernels/modutils. I am almost
> certain that this info exists somewhere. It is just not apparent where,
> and google is still a somewhat clumsy tool for this job.
The way to deal with modules configuration in debian is modconf. It is not
perfect but works with all kernels.
> I _do_ appreciate the fine work done by mostly volunteer maintainers. I
> do understand that documentation gets short-shift in favour of
> functionality. However, Linux is (in my opinion) to the point where
> lacking documentation might be hindering adoption /more/ than lacking
> functionality. I therefore humbly suggest that in this case, MS has done
> some things right: by enlisting their ordinary users in usability tests,
> they have seriously re-engineered the way many things worked in windows.
> Now we all know there are still many ways windows falls far short. This
> is an opportunity. Linux enthusiasts /must/ listen to their struggling
> users if they have any desire for the wider adoption of linux.
>
agree but developpers are not the only one who can write documentation
(and usually not the best at it )
I also ranted about the lack of a documentation team the way we have
translation team (which do wonders).
Documentation is my second concern so i would contribute to it but would
not give it the time to coordinate the work.
Please lead up to the task or look after someone for the job.
Grettings
Alban
Reply to: