On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:47:13 -0500 Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri@gmail.com> wrote:
* Dylan <dylan@dylan.me.uk> [08-14-05 16:38]:
The simple fact is that many man pages are cryptic if not downright indecipherable, especially to users who are unused to unix-style technical docs. You might understand every word of every one you ever need to read, and be able to identify the exact one you need spontaneously every time, but that simply isn't true of us mere mortals.
Are you defending no attempt to use the man pages or not wanting to ask question about what is not understood?
Are you also defining mortal as one who fails to understand *all* the man pages, or one who has not tried.
I frequently fail to understand some of what I read in the man pages, but also frequently understanding comes with further explanation or trial and error, or questions in the list.
*ALL* documentation could be better, but that does not excuse not trying the documentation first. That *is*, AIUI, the reason for documentation.
It is my opinion that man is aimed at those who remember how to do what they want to do, but have forgotten the specific syntax. I know less than that. For me, man has shortcomings: - As this thread illustrates, the user has to know WHAT "name" to ask man about. If he hasn't heard of "name", well ... - man does not distinguish between COMMONLY USED parameters, and those used by specialists. Someone unfamiliar with "name" doesn't know what to pay attention to, vs. what can be skimmed - man normally DOES NOT GIVE EXAMPLES of how commands are used For myself, having read 'man rpm' dozens of times, I have a faint idea of some things 'rpm' can do for me. As a relative newbie, betcha there are things others can use 'rpm' for, that I have NOT LEARNED even with many readings of 'man rpm'. mikus p.s. [BTW, yes I'll use "trial and error" if something is important to understand - but I don't have the energy to apply that to every situation. And answers to questions on the list sometimes lack detail - for example a suggestion to "search on Google" might be more helpful if it said "search on Google for: 'such_and_such' ".]