On 03/19/11 17:18, Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 22:36:41 +0100, Michel Talon<ta...@lpthe.jussieu.fr> wrote:
How many new features of FreeBSD are
correctly documented presently?
Features of the FreeBSD OS are typically well documented.
This high quality affects all kind of documentation, be
it the handbook& FAQ, as well as the manpages that are
available for system binaries, kernel interfaces, library
calls, configuration files and system operations. Also
see the high quality of the source code which is, due
to its style and content (and its comment) also a source
of documentation, mainly designed for programmers instead
of end users.
HAL, on the other hand, is obsolete as well as not part
of the FreeBSD operating system. It's a separate port.
Many ports do follow the quality approach for documentation,
see "man xmms", "man mplayer" or even "man opera" for
examples. Many "modern" software does not provide documentation
in the standard way, try "man firefox" or any KDE program.
In some cases, documentation is left to the users and
scattered across the Internet in web pages and Wikis.
Thats what I love about FBSD- the documentation is better than any other
system out there, in the handbook but the man pages are the most
comprehensive.
Its these ports where there is little to no documentation at all thats
the problem. One thing I'd like to do is thank the port maintainers-
even when the app itself may have no man page, some maintainers have
taken the care to document a man page (or at least a doc under share/)
themselves where they can. Very thoughtful!
A point to make regards HAL is there is next to nix in complete and/or
understandable documentation anywhere for it. Obsolete or not, that is a
bad case...
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
