earlw@pesnta.UUCP (20) (10/11/85)
Well, I think you have made a good point about Unix and the documentation. Maybe what we need is net.docs where good documentation can be placed and expired monthly. The problem is getting the vendor to write and maintain the manuals and documents so the 'average' user can get useful information without resorting to writing a small test program to understand what was just read.
pdg@ihdev.UUCP (P. D. Guthrie) (10/11/85)
In article <2850@pesnta.UUCP> earlw@pesnta.UUCP (Earl Wallace) writes: >Well, I think you have made a good point about Unix and the documentation. >Maybe what we need is net.docs where good documentation can be placed and >expired monthly. The problem is getting the vendor to write and maintain >the manuals and documents so the 'average' user can get useful information >without resorting to writing a small test program to understand what was >just read. What a great idea!! net.docs !! There is a real need for "how-to" manuals on all aspects of unix-life. I think that these documents could be as useful as stuff in net.source for sites without a resident guru. What we all need to do is to share our knowledge and let more people in on the "secrets" of Unix. How about a "How to Port Software Between Berkeley 4.x and System V.x" for starters. Actually, this might go better as a moderated group, just to keep duplications, and junk out. Then of course we would need a net.docs.d for discussion about questionable points in submitted articles. Paul Guthrie ihnp4!ihdev!pdg
mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (10/12/85)
In article <2850@pesnta.UUCP> earlw@pesnta.UUCP (Earl Wallace) writes: >Well, I think you have made a good point about Unix and the documentation. >Maybe what we need is net.docs where good documentation can be placed and >expired monthly. The problem is getting the vendor to write and maintain >the manuals and documents so the 'average' user can get useful information >without resorting to writing a small test program to understand what was >just read. Well, I'm not sure I agree. My shiny new 3B2 came with a stack of manuals that fills up a 30 inch bookshelf (and took me all day to sort and assemble into the binders and integrate the updates.) Sun comes with a similar stack of manuals. So does Masscomp. So does Xenix. So does PC/IX. Etc. You know what? I can never find anything in any of them. When I want to look something up, I'll dig out any reasonably old copy of the UNIX programmers manual - either 4.1BSD or System III or System Vr1 will do nicely. 4.2 would probably do fine too except that we can't get the official Usenix ones, so I have a thick notebook which is unwieldy. Or I'll just look in /usr/man. Does this make me a guru? Well, not really. I did manage to memorize what sections 1 through 8 stand for (and if this weren't a moving target I would get my job done faster) and I do know what command I want info about. But I don't think I've ever had time to sit down and read through 30 inches of manuals to see what's available in the system. This huge set of manuals seems to be viewed as a requirement by the marketing establishment to get market acceptance. I suppose it must be useful to somebody. But for a reference manual I want something compact, like the UPM. One binder (well, two if it won't fit.) Mark
lear@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (eliot lear) (10/14/85)
> Well, I'm not sure I agree. My shiny new 3B2 came with a stack of manuals > that fills up a 30 inch bookshelf (and took me all day to sort and assemble > into the binders and integrate the updates.) Sun comes with a similar stack > of manuals. So does Masscomp. So does Xenix. So does PC/IX. Etc. > > You know what? I can never find anything in any of them. Neither can many people, especially those people that have not memorized sections 1 through 8. I like the idea of net.doc but how about something more on the lines of net.questions (or net.answers or net.questions AND net.questions.answers :-)). eliot -- The opinions expressed above reflect no one's opinion save my own and are so unique, they should be copyrighted! [lear@topaz.rutgers.edu] [{allegra,seismo}!topaz!lear]
hans@erisun.UUCP (Hans Albertson) (10/15/85)
[]
To some extent I have to agree.
To wit: Some, quite a few, of UNIX' proponents are not terribly well
educated in computer science.
The awe some seem to feel for the gods, Ritchie, Kernighan,
Bourne et al is annoying.
But: Not efficient? What version are you using? 4.1 was reasonably
efficient for the VAX, even in comparison with VMS V2. 4.2 is
not too bad compared to VMS V4.1. Both trade efficiency for
functionality.
Bad doc? I personally find the man pages of UNIX easier on the
mind than the diarrhoea of DEC's manual shelves. Difference of
temperament, no doubt. One thing: While a DEC manual will repeat
any piece of info some 3-4 times, a UNIX man page is mostly non
redundant.
Usenix not on par with ACM. Well. Of course not. Did you expect
it to? You should compare a Usenix conf with say DECUS. It compares
quite well, actually.
UNIX fanatics refusing to discuss other OSes? My favourite is
TOPS 20. Any day. Not that i've used it as much as UNIX, but
I recognize excellence when I see it. Soon I may have a chance to
check on ITS. I have a feeling I'll like that. IBM's VM seems
like a good design too. BUT, unlike UNIX they are NON-PORTABLE.
Viciously so. I'll discuss your ears to cinders if you like...
I was weened on VMS, but it's system calls are just too many,
with millions of parameters, and they all have to be there every
time. And it's file system imposes formats on files. IMPOSES!
not permits. IMPOSES.
Then again, maybe you were just joking.
--
Hans Albertsson, USENET/uucp: {decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!log-hb!hans
Real World: TeleLOGIC AB, Box 1001, S-14901 Nynashamn,SWEDENron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (10/15/85)
> Neither can many people, especially those people that have not memorized > sections 1 through 8. I like the idea of net.doc but how about something > more on the lines of net.questions (or net.answers or net.questions AND > net.questions.answers :-)). > > eliot How about net.pinheads?
dc@datlog.UUCP ( David Crone ) (10/16/85)
In article <354@ihdev.UUCP> pdg@ihdev.UUCP (55224-P. D. Guthrie) writes: >In article <2850@pesnta.UUCP> earlw@pesnta.UUCP (Earl Wallace) writes: >>Well, I think you have made a good point about Unix and the documentation. >>Maybe what we need is net.docs where good documentation can be placed and >>expired monthly. > > >What a great idea!! net.docs !! There is a real need for "how-to" >manuals on all aspects of unix-life. I think that these documents could >be as useful as stuff in net.source for sites without a resident guru. >What we all need to do is to share our knowledge and let more people in >on the "secrets" of Unix. How about a "How to Port Software Between >Berkeley 4.x and System V.x" for starters. Actually, this might go >better as a moderated group, just to keep duplications, and junk out. >Then of course we would need a net.docs.d for discussion about >questionable points in submitted articles. > > Paul Guthrie > ihnp4!ihdev!pdg I think both Paul and Earl are missing the point!!!! UNIX is now a COMMERCIAL ( :-) ) operating system used by manufacturers, software houses and believe it or not END USERS of applications. It's time that AT&T and Berkeley revamped/rewrote the system documentation so anybody could at least have some understanding of the operation of the utilities without a) writing test programs b) relying on UNIX 'gurus' or c) looking at the source code (if your're lucky enough to have the licence) . The idea of having a news directory to disseminate 'good' documenation without making it available to all through the proper channels(AT&T and Berkeley) is to me completely worthless. Remember the UNIX community is larger than the net.!!! UNIX's long term existence now rests within the commercial arena. Such companies that are using or wish to use UNIX cannot/will not (ultimately) rely on the guru principle of operation and the lack of good OS documentation could jeopardise the future of the system. Dave (19th Nervous Breakdown) Crone (These opinions are mine alone, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers or fellow-workers)
nick@inset.UUCP (Nick Stoughton) (10/18/85)
In article <1542@cbosgd.UUCP> mark@cbpavo.UUCP (Mark Horton) writes: >You know what? I can never find anything in any of them. When I want to >look something up, I'll dig out any reasonably old copy of the UNIX >programmers manual - either 4.1BSD or System III or System Vr1 will do >nicely. 4.2 would probably do fine too except that we can't get the >official Usenix ones, so I have a thick notebook which is unwieldy. >Or I'll just look in /usr/man. I know the feeling all too well...I've resorted to looking in a V5 (yes, version 5, not Sys V) on more than one occasion, though I must admit that the commonest manual I use is V7. Even the distributed 4.2 manuals are too thick to fit into a single binder, which is what I really want. Trouble is, the more that goes into a system, the more documentation there has to be with it.