Re: Bug#128852: doc-linux-text: Suggested addition to package: rank newbie pointers
On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 02:26:16AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 06:37:36PM -0700, Chris Tillman wrote:
> > I was discussing bash's response of 'command not found' in bug 106170
> > with Matthias Klose and Matt Zimmerman. My idea was that bash could
> > make a reference to dhelp to give new users a place to start when they
> > are just beginning. But dhelp is not installed as standard.
> > Matthias' suggestion was even better, I think: point to a text
> > document somewhere that gives a lottle bootstrapping information for
> > users just getting their feet wet in *nix.
> > Since doc-linux-text is installed by default in new installations, and
> > since this qualifies as linux doc (text), I think it should go in your
> > package.
> I figured I ought to run this past debian-doc first. Is doc-linux-text
> the right place for this? The obvious alternative is doc-debian. I'm not
> necessarily opposed to this proposal (nor am I trying to get rid of a
> bug without doing anything!), but doc-linux's remit is to provide the
> documentation from the Linux Documentation Project, not to be a general
> repository for system documentation, and I would like some wider
> discussion before extending this too much.
Yes, that sounds right.
> Also note that your documentation would be equally useful for new Debian
> GNU/Hurd (and possibly Debian GNU/BSD in the future?) users, although at
> the moment such new users are likely to be fairly technically competent
> > /usr/share/doc/doc-linux-text/README-commands.txt
> > This is a jumping-off reference point for new users who may be
> > completely unfamiliar with Linux commands. It does not contain all
> > the information you need about using the Linux console, but instead
> > just gives you enough information to get started finding the
> > information you need.
> Are you sure that all this wouldn't fit better in a proper HOWTO or
> mini-HOWTO? The existing getting-started-type documents are slightly
> less of an introduction from scratch than this, true, but that's not to
> say that an even more newbie-friendly document like this in the LDP
> collection would be a bad idea: imagine the Debian-Introduction
> mini-HOWTO, for example. I would then be happy to refer to that
> specially from /usr/share/doc/doc-linux-text/README.Debian, and you'd
> still have the document installed by default.
This makes a lot of sense. I'm willing to initiate that.
> > info [subject]
> > A lot of Debian Linux documentation
> Pet peeve: I think our documentation should generally use the correct
> name for the distribution, i.e. "Debian GNU/Linux".
> > (I think it would be better to add a shell script named something like
> > helpcmds instead of making the user type this.
> doc-linux currently includes no binaries or scripts, but I suppose
> /usr/bin/debian-intro or something would be possible. Comments?
> I think this is a good document, and that it would be useful to have
> installed on standard systems. I'm just not entirely sure what the right
> place for it is.
> To debian-doc: please copy all followups to bug #128852.
> Colin Watson [email@example.com]
*------v--------- Installing Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 --------v------*
| <http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/installmanual> |
| debian-imac (potato): <http://debian-imac.sourceforge.net> |
| Chris Tillman firstname.lastname@example.org |
| May the Source be with you |