home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Path: sparky!uunet!nwnexus!danubius
- From: danubius@halcyon.com (Joseph R. Pannon)
- Subject: Re: Corrupt 'tar' man page
- Message-ID: <1993Jan10.223338.4051@nwnexus.WA.COM>
- Sender: sso@nwnexus.WA.COM (System Security Officer)
- Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
- References: <1io8dqINNrc@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> <1993Jan10.060026.10328@nwnexus.WA.COM> <1993Jan10.134826.23887@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 22:33:38 GMT
- Lines: 63
-
- In article <1993Jan10.134826.23887@klaava.Helsinki.FI> wirzeniu@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lars Wirzenius) writes:
-
- >The first form of online docs for Unix was man pages. They are nice,
- >but could be better. One alternative format for man pages is Texinfo,
- >developed by the GNU Project. Texinfo allows hypertext (links in the
- >text to other parts of the document), has better readers (that allow
- >following the links), not just less or more, and is better for writing
- >longer documents in the form of books. Texinfo is the preferred
- >format of documentation for GNU programs, and the GNU people
- >ultimately want to have all documentation in that format.
- >
- >Man pages and Texinfo are not compatible, and it is very non-trivial
- >to convert Texinfo to a man page (although the other way can be
- >automated). Texinfo to man page conversion has to be done by hand.
- >
- >Therefore, there is little chance that you can get man to understand
- >the Texinfo document. You'll just have to live with two different
- >forms of documentation. Life's a bitch.
-
- Thank you, Lars, for that informative reply.
-
- >However, assuming it is because nobody has written a tar man page for
- >GNU tar, and you want it, you might want to remember how Linux has
- >become what it is: people who want something, and find that it hasn't
- >been done, do it themselves. Doing something doesn't require knowing
- >everything, it shouldn't be too hard to write a very basic man page
- >for tar (after you know a little about tar). Linux has not developed
- >thanks to people who pop into c.o.l and telling people that such and
- >such has to be done.
-
- I read you loud and clear! However, I take an exception to your
- insinuation that in my post I was trying to tell you guys how things
- should be done. All I asked for was information. I wasn't even sure if
- it was only a problem with my setup, or it was SLS-wide. How you could
- construe this as criticism of the activists' work is beyond me!
- Believe me, even if I don't start my posts with a tribute to the
- tremendous work you guys have done, I really do appreciate the
- product. As a matter of fact, when I brought up my X the first time, I
- did post an upbeat message about how fast Linux was running the X server.
- (I didn't mention this one yet, but I even dusted off my old Sibelius
- records!)
- But I think the greatest tribute to Linux is shown by the huge
- interest it generated among people new to Unix. The high scroll rate of
- this news group is a testimony to that. I can understand you (and some
- others') frustration with the repeated questions on the same subject that
- this increased interest brings, but that can also be looked at as the
- price of success. Besides, my question wasn't even one I've seen asked
- during the last few weeks of monitoring this group, and it certainly was
- no criticism.
-
- >If anybody writes a tar man page, and wants it to be included in the
- >Linux Doc set (when that becomes ready in a few years), send me a note
- >and I'll direct you to the person who coordinates the man pages and
- >other program specific documentation (I don't have his name handy at
- >the moment, sorry).
-
- I'm sure you can count for many of the current newbies to make our
- contributions later as we come up on the learning curve providing we don't
- get our noses bitten off before we get there. ;-)
-
- Thanks again for taking the time to respond in your (no doubt) busy
- schedule,
- Joe Pannon
-