discuss: GNU Linux Command Line Tools Summary Ready for inclusion
Subject:
Re: GNU Linux Command Line Tools Summary Ready for inclusion
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
21 Feb 2005 06:42:16 -0000
Message-Id: <20050221064242.GA823@lafn.org>
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 09:20:33AM +1100, Gareth Anderson wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Yes, I have decided to CC the entire discussion group on this.
>
> I believe that Tabatha would be the most familiar with this document.
>
> Yes, its being through 2 reviewers (neither was able to do the entire
> document, but their advice allowed me to revise the document as a
> whole).
> Its had a basic technical review,
I just can't believe this. See below.
> I don't think its a good idea to review it yet again.
I just now reviewed the part on the vi and emacs editor. It fails. vim
is not very difficult to learn if one learns only a small number of
commands. You say to search for other text editors on the Internet and
provide a link to sourceforge. I used the link to sourceforge and
searched for "text editors". Nothing found. "vulnerable" should be
"venerable".
Then I looks at "xargs". It was terrible. Your explanation is wrong and
and the example with grep doesn't do what you claim. To do what you
claim it does, one doesn't need to use xargs. Just type ls | grep work.
It's not hard to understand xargs but you claim otherwise and fail to
explain what xargs does.
In my sampling of less than 1% of the doc, I found a couple of mangled
sentences that made no sense. Thus I think the doc at present is way
below the quality that LDP needs.
Now don't just fix the 1% I've sampled. Fix the other 99% too. You
need to test out all examples to see it they work right. You need to
read the man pages and search the Internet to see if you've got it
right. I don't think you've done this. Sorry to have to be so blunt
about it but I want to see good quality docs in LDP.
> This document has being worked upon for >2 years now and is likely
David Lawyer
