In <[🔎] 87zle4497u.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org>, John Hasler wrote: >Dotan Cohen wrote: >> That sounds more like a problem than a solution. I would not try an OS >> that had a 1000 page manual. I want simple, not comprehensive. > >Then you'd better give up computers. It takes more than 1000 pages to >properly document any operating system. Try "ls /usr/share/man/* | wc". Heh. I also value comprehensive over simple, but there is quite a bit of middle-ground. A 1000-page document is getting really close to a multi- volume printing. If you are going to have to go multi-volume, it makes more sense to have much smaller "Standard Operations and Common Issues" document (which most people would consider "the manual") that directed the user to more specialized documentation for the cases it does not cover. The documentation for Lenny (or FreeBSD) can't hope to be truly comprehensive. It is built on a number of documentation sources (both industry standards and references for proprietary components) that can't be incorporated directly because of their licensing and have to be referenced instead. Luckily, only the rarest of individuals will *need* to seek some of that documentation out and *no one* will need to seek /all/ of it out.[1] -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/ [1] I am exempting alien archaeologists attempting to reconstruct the OS long after our civilization has destroyed itself. But archaeologists are used to not having all the pieces for many, many years, if ever.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.