Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:35:55 +0200 From: Phil Schulz <ph.schulz@gmx.de> To: Herbert Wolverson <herberticus@gmail.com>, questions@freebsd.org Subject: BSD docs better than Linux docs (was: Re: Testimonial - Thanks to FreeBSD) Message-ID: <413F894B.4040101@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <54e1b60304090812255a3ca1ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <413E35CC.2050301@no-log.org> <54e1b60304090812255a3ca1ba@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[snip - Testimonal]
> I've played with Linux, but the BSD documentation is always more
> complete,
Actually, I've recently found out that this isn't always true. Some
Linux man pages in sections 2 and 3 seem to be more complete than the
BSD equivalents, i.e. have examples or documentation of the used data
structures. Take a look at nanosleep(3), for example.
But I promise, as soon as I've found an appartment and have moved, I
will start to change those kind of things when I discover them.
But I think, generally speaking you are definitely right.
Regards,
Phil.
--
Did you know...
If you play a Windows 2000 CD backwards, you hear satanic messages,
but what's worse is when you play it forward....
...it installs Windows 2000
-- Alfred Perlstein on chat@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?413F894B.4040101>