On 12 October 2010 11:20, Ben Armstrong <sy...@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> wrote: > On 12/10/10 06:09 AM, Vitaly wrote: >> Okay, I admit bad joke with a man lh config. >> However, this does not eliminate the illogical and not intuitive man >> lh_config and man lb_config >> And so carefully did not want to see here. >> As an example >> >> gedit -> g_edit -> g edit -> s edit >> and man s_edit >> would be very logical to the precepts of your mom? > > If you are saying you don't like (or understand) the rename of the > command multiple times, sorry, that's just one of the costs of development. > > As a developer, an idea you at first thought was good (filling /usr/bin > with a whole bunch of helpers which, in practice, are not called by the > user individually) later turns out to be bad (i.e. pollution of /usr/bin > is not very kind!) At around the same time you decide that the original > name of the thing you wrote, live-helper, (which undoubtedly was > influenced by the prior existence of 'debhelper' and you can see > parallels in the structure,) is no longer really descriptive of the > purpose of the software. Helper? Helper for what? So you decide to > rename it to live-build, because it's the part of the software that > *builds* the live image. Much clearer now, yes? > > So what would you ask us to do? Get all of our ideas perfect the very > first time? >
I would like to add that 'man lb config' displays the man page for 'lb' which refers to 'live-build' which refers to the subcommand man pages such as lb_config. There is an issue with lb(1) describing lh(1) which should be fixed if it was not already but other than that the man pages are pretty good. Thanks Michal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-live-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinjxkpoo9az4+pmuvjlz=gdum+ktz8regz5t...@mail.gmail.com
