[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Linux/Debian documentation suggestion [Reply to many replies+attempt to elaborate]

On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 07:44:01AM +0200, Glenn Moeller-Holst wrote:
> > > This Linux/Debian documentation suggestion, regards Linux and
> > > applications commands.
> > >
> > > It is proposed that the kernel and applications packets (.deb, .rpm)
> > > includes (or has the possibilty to include) documentation about the
> > > package commands. Maybe in many languages like Mac OS X. Mac OS X has
> > > each language text in each data-fork.
> Johannes Wiedersich:
> There are no rpm's in debian.
> Glenn:
> I know, but the idea was that more than the Debian package system might
> implement it.
> Johannes Wiedersich:
> Almost all debian packages have man pages. They do exist in different
> languages. If you miss something follow the advice in
> 'man 7 undocumented'
> Steve Greenland:
> They do. Have you looked? Some packages with large documentation sets
> distribute them as a seperate package, the documentation package usually
> has a name in the form "<package>-doc". Some packages lack upstream
> documentation; we cannot distribute what has not been written. But the
> vast majority of packages have a man page for each command.
> Glenn:
> I know about man-pages.

Good :-) What documentation did you mean then? At the moment packages
already have the possibility to include documentation - and most do..
(yes: for some the documentation is so bit to warrant a separate -doc

> ...

> pc:/# which vi
> /usr/bin/vi
> pc:/# dpkg -S /usr/bin/vi
> dpkg: /usr/bin/vi ikke fundet. ("ikke fundet" in english: Not found)

> ...

> I conclude: If it start with / or dpkg it is not 
> in a package - maybe it then is
> in the kernel?

There are several implementations vi (and vi-like) editors - nvi, vim,
elvis (and probably more).  Different users have different preferences,
and to allow more than one vi-implementation to be concurrently
installed, debian uses "alternatives". More info at:

> Glenn:
> Here are some examples of what would be nice:
> pc:/# sud?
> bash: sud?: command not found
> pc:/# sud*
> bash: sud*: command not found
> pc:/#

Try command-line completion instead: type "sud" and then hit the TAB
key. Hitting it once will autocomplete as much as possible - if it
beeps, hit TAB again to get a list

> Glenn:
> Instead of "command not found" it could have responded:
> pc:/# sud*
> More than one command found:
> sudo
> suddock
> ...
> pc:/#

Let me guess: Do you have a VMS background?

In linux/unix the *shell* expands wildcards before the command(s) get
invoked. Wouldn't it be more confusing to have different rules for
wildcards in command names?

> I am not the most experienced Debian-user. I have made approx. 5 
> installation -
> my latest is Etch. From an end-user standpoint it is the best Debian I have
> used.

Hope this helps
Karl E. Jorgensen
karl@jorgensen.org.uk  http://www.jorgensen.org.uk/
karl@jorgensen.com     http://karl.jorgensen.com
==== Today's fortune:
You will be audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: