From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jul 6 14:42:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from dt054n86.san.rr.com (dt054n86.san.rr.com [24.30.152.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74D314CE6; Tue, 6 Jul 1999 14:42:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Received: from localhost (doug@localhost) by dt054n86.san.rr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA08196; Tue, 6 Jul 1999 14:42:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 14:42:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug X-Sender: doug@dt054n86.san.rr.com To: "Brian F. Feldman" Cc: Chris Costello , Alex Zepeda , hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: 'rtfm' script In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote: > On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > > Which can be disabled in the bash port before the next release... > > > > No, that's a really stupid idea. > > Thanks! But still, I don't think rtfm is very appropriate... Can we look > for something better, more obvious? Or perhaps it would be in the motd > like /stand/sysinstall is.... people would need to be aware of this. I think your logic is faulty here. There are already many adequate resources in the motd, but your argument for the 'rtfm script' presupposes that the person has not looked at the motd, because if they had they wouldn't need the script. Honestly, while this is one of those things that sounds good when you first start talking about it, in practice I don't see what we gain from it. Doug -- On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does. -- Will Rogers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message