3 ms·

I'm not that hardcore about it, but I still agree this really shouldn't be in the official docs. Maybe in a tutorial or a set of slides. I do agree with some p

I'm not that hardcore about it, but I still agree this really shouldn't be in the official docs. Maybe in a tutorial or a set of slides. I do agree with some professionalism in things that want to be taken seriously. I don't even really like the "Apt with super cow powers." I do agree this isn't about political correctness. At one time GNU tools were just a bunch of devs trying to write open source tooling for fun or to learn. But with it being such a huge part of our industry now, it does need to grow up. If you're working on your own small open source projects, have fun with the docs and comments. But don't be like Stallman. Realize if your tools are really successful, those quips might get cut out one day. c'est la vie

dfox 9y ago
My feeling is that most of GNU manuals in texinfo format are borderline useless because the structure is simply wrong, the random jokes are somewhat tangential issue.
- sandov 9y ago
  I Don't know if we're talking about the same thing but I've found the format of man pages to be absolutely useless for me. Maybe I'm too dumb/noob to understand them, but then what's left for the folk who just switched to linux and wamts to learn about commands.
  - grzm 9y ago
    Texinfo and man are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texinfo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texinfo > "Notably, man is not available as an output format from the standard Texinfo tools. While Texinfo is used for writing the documentation of GNU software, which typically is used in Unix-like environments such as GNU/Linux, where man pages are the traditional format for documentation, the rationale for this is that man pages have a strict conventional format, used traditionally as quick reference guides, whereas typical Texinfo applications are for tutorials as well as reference manuals. As such, no benefit is seen in expressing Texinfo content in man page format. Moreover, many GNU projects eschew man pages almost completely, referring the reader of the provided man page (which often describes itself as seldom maintained) to the Info document." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_page They can take some getting used to if you're not familiar with them, but given how much documentation is available in these formats, it's worth taking a few hours to become accustomed to them. A lot of it is duplicated online as well, so you can often use your favorite search engine.
- majewsky 9y ago
  Word. GNU texinfo is so fucking confusing that I only ever invoke it as info --subnodes -o - $PROGRAM | less That dumps the entire manual for $PROGRAM into `less`, where I can then use regex-searches like a normal humanbeing.
  - zeveb 9y ago
    It's wonderful to use in emacs, and back before I started using emacs ISTR that pinfo was a great way to read info. I used to hate how GNU manpages would point me at the info docs, but honestly nowadays I prefer info. It really is nice — like a pre-CSS, pre-JavaScript HTML, only it can be beautifully typeset too.
    - keiyakins 9y ago
      Yeah, I hate info, but the problem is info(1), not the entire texinfo stack. The html output is pretty good and I already know how to navigate it, so I usually use that

dfox 9y ago

My feeling is that most of GNU manuals in texinfo format are borderline useless because the structure is simply wrong, the random jokes are somewhat tangential issue.

sandov 9y ago
I Don't know if we're talking about the same thing but I've found the format of man pages to be absolutely useless for me. Maybe I'm too dumb/noob to understand them, but then what's left for the folk who just switched to linux and wamts to learn about commands.
- grzm 9y ago
  Texinfo and man are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texinfo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texinfo > "Notably, man is not available as an output format from the standard Texinfo tools. While Texinfo is used for writing the documentation of GNU software, which typically is used in Unix-like environments such as GNU/Linux, where man pages are the traditional format for documentation, the rationale for this is that man pages have a strict conventional format, used traditionally as quick reference guides, whereas typical Texinfo applications are for tutorials as well as reference manuals. As such, no benefit is seen in expressing Texinfo content in man page format. Moreover, many GNU projects eschew man pages almost completely, referring the reader of the provided man page (which often describes itself as seldom maintained) to the Info document." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_page They can take some getting used to if you're not familiar with them, but given how much documentation is available in these formats, it's worth taking a few hours to become accustomed to them. A lot of it is duplicated online as well, so you can often use your favorite search engine.
majewsky 9y ago
Word. GNU texinfo is so fucking confusing that I only ever invoke it as info --subnodes -o - $PROGRAM | less That dumps the entire manual for $PROGRAM into `less`, where I can then use regex-searches like a normal humanbeing.
- zeveb 9y ago
  It's wonderful to use in emacs, and back before I started using emacs ISTR that pinfo was a great way to read info. I used to hate how GNU manpages would point me at the info docs, but honestly nowadays I prefer info. It really is nice — like a pre-CSS, pre-JavaScript HTML, only it can be beautifully typeset too.
  - keiyakins 9y ago
    Yeah, I hate info, but the problem is info(1), not the entire texinfo stack. The html output is pretty good and I already know how to navigate it, so I usually use that