Re: Majordomo w/Smail ?
John Foster writes:
[snip]
> I'm not intending this to be a flame, but I think that we can all
> lighten up a bit when it comes to replying to posts on this list. If
> you read my post you'll see that I had read the docs - and they were
> wrong. As were the scripts. Perhaps you are running a different
> version of perl/majordomo/smail/Debian than I was.
Entirely possible, BTW, I understand what you are going through. I have the
same level of fustration when tackling a "new to me" package. The majordomo
package (1.2) puts all the scripts and "non-specific" files in the right
places. I only had to create/modify the "site-specific" information.
> I wonder whether there is a co-ordinated effort to keep the
> documentaion 'together' in the Debain Project? There are standards of
> course, but how many times have you seen "This documentation was
> incomplete when it was written, and is now completely out of date"?
Due to the diverse nature of LINUX in general, I don't think that the DOC's
will ever be 100% "complete and 'up to date'". And to add to the confusion,
most users don't install 100% of all available packages. As an example, I have
no need for TEX... therefore, there could be errors in the documentation that
the experienced TEX user would know about, but an novice would get bit on. I
would never find such an error since I don't use TEX. I don't read the
messages on TEX since I don't use it. So, I would not be 'up to date' on
issues of TEX and could be easily bit by it if I decided to install TEX.
--
-= Sent by Debian 1.2 Linux =-
Thomas Kocourek KD4CIK - member of ARRL
tomk@westgac3.dragon.com
--... ...-- ... -.. . -.- -.. ....- -.-. .. -.-
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: