Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 03:44:04 -0500 From: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl>, Joe Abley <jabley@patho.gen.nz> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is FreeBSD dead? Well, not in theory... Message-ID: <200003122012.PAA00812@etinc.com> In-Reply-To: <20000312193205.W68308@daemon.ninth-circle.org> References: <20000312083736.A27614@patho.gen.nz> <200003101840.NAA12885@etinc.com> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003111306520.14049-100000@bsd1.nyct.net> <200003111841.NAA17534@etinc.com> <20000312083736.A27614@patho.gen.nz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 07:32 PM 3/12/00 +0100, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote: >-On [20000312 00:00], Joe Abley (jabley@patho.gen.nz) wrote: >>On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 01:36:31PM -0500, Dennis wrote: > >>> Another point is that Open Source is virtually synonomous with "Totally >>> undocumented". >> >>This is sillier. > >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 Plus by the time you're done they will be outdated...another common problem.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 The books are out of date before they hit the stores. DB . 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?200003122012.PAA00812>