Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 14:01:42 +0600 (ALMT) From: Boris Popov <bp@butya.kz> To: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> Cc: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl>, Joe Abley <jabley@patho.gen.nz>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is FreeBSD dead? Well, not in theory... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10003131346310.55157-100000@lion.butya.kz> In-Reply-To: <200003122012.PAA00812@etinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote: > At 07:32 PM 3/12/00 +0100, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote: > > > >Exactly, and it also slightly pisses me off... > > > >Then I guess I wrote all the manpages and documents for nothing. > > > >elf.5 comes to mind for a very handy resource. > > > >http://home.wxs.nl/~asmodai/newbus-draft.txt comes to mind. And when > >that is finished the manpages will follow. > > > >That's also why I am wasting my time slowly documenting the FreeBSD > >internals in my spare time. > > "slowly" is the key word here. Real products are documented before they are > in commercial use. Plus by the time you're done they will be > outdated...another common problem. > > Why are you arguing this point? Is there anyone that believes that Linux > and FreeBSD are well documented? Please. The books are out of date before > they hit the stores. This is completly pointless. The user side of the FreeBSD is very well documented. The kernel internals has more poor documentation. But if someone want or need to contribute kernel side code, he is expected to be clueful enough to understand kernel sources _and_ ideolgy. In fact, it is doesn't require too much time. When you're jump in to truck, it is not too hard to track related source code changes and keep your code synched up. -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.10003131346310.55157-100000>