Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Tim Watts Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:09:54 +0100 Lines: 27 Message-ID: <2c80eb-d3r.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> References: <540D47F9.5080601@thadlabs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net WxNNhjghWtkty9/6AFZR/A17LWtWkMuExKtwpQ7hJi4aWjX2WB X-Orig-Path: squidward.local.dionic.net!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:InRQg6H7nLMu7PYg5koIUD6b6gU= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 In-Reply-To: <540D47F9.5080601@thadlabs.com> Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:12011 On 08/09/14 07:08, Thad Floryan wrote: > Heh, it took longer to write the man page than it took to design the > program, implement it, and test it. Writing UNIX-style man pages is > a real pain which is why we see such poor or non-existent man pages > for most linux distros nowadays. Having written a few man pages, I think that is not down to the markup used - but because fewer and fewer people have been exposed to quality documentation - eg: Our university's VAX/VMS sytemm in 1986 had two full 6 foot by 4 ft bookcases solid with DEC manuals. Nothing was undocumented - with a uniform format, uniform level of detail and loads of examples. The online help system was not bad either. Now you get a "quickstart" guide that says how to start the thing if you're lucky. Even prosumer routers have shoddy documentation and you end up on forums and FAQ and wiki sites trying to figure stuff out.