discuss: Thread: Net-HOWTO (was Re: Bug#178233: doc-linux-text: Net-HOWTO corruption)

On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 02:05:32AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 04:35:50PM +0100, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > Package: doc-linux-text
> > Version: 2003.01-1
> > Severity: minor
> > 
> > There are errors in the Net-HOWTO which appear to have
> > become corrupted by someone inserting the work "Ethernet"
> > randomly into the text.?
No, it hasn't been inserted but "Ethernet" has in all cases replaced a
string of 8 characters.

> > Thus, on line 1160:
> > ?? root# route add -net 192.1Ethernetetmask 255.255.255.0 eth0 
This formerly was: add -net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0 
"Ethernet" has replaced "68.1.0 n".  It has only happened several times
in the doc.
> > 
> > I report this here because the upstream e-mail address ####@####.####
> > causes a "User unknown" rejection.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Since the submitter of this Debian bug report notes that the author's
> e-mail address bounces, does anyone know where I might contact Joshua
> Drake? He certainly used to be a prominent LDP guy, although less so
> recently as far as I've seen.

A couple of weeks ago he sent me email, but since his ISP is on a spam
blacklist, I didn't get it, nor did I attempt to respond (have no idea
what the email said).

I'm interested in the HOWTO although I've never read it.  When it became
unmaintained in 1999, I found someone in my local lug who wanted to
maintain it.  But Poet insisted on doing it so he became the new
maintainer.  I just took a couple of samples of the doc and found them
out-of-date.  For example, Alan Cox is stated to be the current
maintainer of Linux networking code, but he left this job in 1999.

It doesn't even contain the revision date and mentions 2.2 kernels but
not 2.4.  I think it may be stale and now wish that the volunteer in the
LUG had taken it over.  He might have done a better job of maintaining it.

Furthermore, Poet asks for money in it:

1.1. Assisting with the Net-HOWTO

If you would like to assist with this document, there are two primary avenues
that are extremely helpful.

  * [http://www.linuxports.com/cart/] Purchase an OpenBook! If you purchase
    OpenDocs books, OpenDocs Publishing will donate a portion of the proceeds
    back to the [http://www.opendocspublishing.com/] Open Source
    Documentation Fund. This fund assists authors financially while they
    continue to write documentation for Open Source projects.
   
  * Provide a monetary contribution to the document. By contributing, you can
    even request what you would like to have updated, written, or expanded
    within the document. To provide a monetary contribution, please contact
    [http://www.commandprompt.com/] Command Prompt, Inc. You may also contact
    ####@####.#### Joshua Drake.
   
  * If you have written something that you would like to contribute, please
    email it to ####@####.#### ####@####.####
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
How many authors besides Poet and company have received payment from the
Open Source Documentation Fund?

			David Lawyer

Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that someone
can fix the corruption in the file?  The last posting I can see on the
subject (#3966) is from David Laywer Sun, 26 Jan 2003 23:32:47 -0800 and
the document appears to have been broken for over a year now.  It looks
to be quite out of date, too.

The email in the document ####@####.#### does not exist.  I sent
an email to Joshua Drake via ####@####.#### yesterday, asking him
to fix his document or set it free into the "unmaintained" section.

-- 
-IAN!  Ian! D. Allen   Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
       EMail: ####@####.####   WWW: http://www.idallen.com/
       College professor (Linux) via: http://teaching.idallen.com/
       Support free and open public digital rights:  http://eff.org/

> Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that someone
> can fix the corruption in the file?  

I need more specifics. What is/was corrupted? I re-published it
to see if there is any difference.

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/text/Net-HOWTO

-- 
Greg Ferguson / LDP volunteer
####@####.####

On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 03:17:27PM -0000, G Ferguson / LDP wrote:
> > Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that someone
> > can fix the corruption in the file?  
> 
> I need more specifics. What is/was corrupted? I re-published it
> to see if there is any difference.
> 
> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/text/Net-HOWTO

See the previous list archive messages (a year old) about the corruption.

This will find some of it:

    $ grep '[a-z0-9]Ethernet' Net-HOWTO
    |        root# route add -net 192.1Ethernetetmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
    Ethernetmbers of hosts ).
    ethernet segment on B: their datagramEthernete directed to router As ppp0
    link (which in this example is broEthernetey could still continue to talk to
    still talk to hosts on BBsethernet segment. TheEthernetnications can still

The author contact email is a dead address:

    ####@####.#### Joshua Drake.

-- 
-IAN!  Ian! D. Allen   Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
       EMail: ####@####.####   WWW: http://www.idallen.com/
       College professor (Linux) via: http://teaching.idallen.com/
       Support free and open public digital rights:  http://eff.org/

---------- Original Message -------------
Subject: Re: Net-HOWTO (was Re: Bug#178233: doc-linux-text: Net-HOWTO corruption)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:40:40 -0400
From: "Ian! D. Allen" ####@####.####
To: ####@####.####


On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 03:17:27PM -0000, G Ferguson / LDP wrote:
> > Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that someone
> > can fix the corruption in the file?  
> 
>> I need more specifics. What is/was corrupted? I re-published it
>> to see if there is any difference.
>>
>> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/text/Net-HOWTO
>
> This will find some of it:
>
>    $ grep '[a-z0-9]Ethernet' Net-HOWTO

Thanks. That does help. I'll see if I can fix what is broken.

> The author contact email is a dead address:
>
>    ####@####.#### Joshua Drake.

yes it is.



-- 
Greg Ferguson / LDP volunteer
####@####.####

On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 06:24:35PM -0000, G Ferguson / LDP wrote:
> 
> ---------- Original Message -------------
> Subject: Re: Net-HOWTO (was Re: Bug#178233: doc-linux-text: Net-HOWTO corruption)
> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:40:40 -0400
> From: "Ian! D. Allen" ####@####.####
> To: ####@####.####
> 
> 
> > > Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that someone
> > > can fix the corruption in the file?  
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 03:17:27PM -0000, G Ferguson / LDP wrote:
> Thanks. That does help. I'll see if I can fix what is broken.

I copied the Net-3-HOWTO by Terry Dawson from the Internet and compared
it to Net-HOWTO (which is the new name for Net-3-HOWTO).  Using wdiff I
found that the two are mostly identical, save for many cosmetic changes
made by Poet.  These changes included added commas, removing the word
"then", etc. and don't seem to improve the readability of the HOWTO much.

There were a few substantive changes but a major change was the adding
of pleas to pay Poet via paypal.  These pleas (and urls to click on)
were inserted at 43 different places in the HOWTO (per grep -c).
So I think that Poet just did a minimum amount of improvement on it and
sort of turned it into a "fund raising" product with all the pleas for
money.

The reason that I'm interested in this HOWTO is that when Poet took it
over, I had also found a volunteer in my local LUG that was willing to
take it over.  I don't think he is around anymore but I plan to ask on
the LUG mailing list if someone is willing to take it over.

			David Lawyer

>>> Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that someone
>>> can fix the corruption in the file?  
>> 
>> I need more specifics. What is/was corrupted? I re-published it
>> to see if there is any difference.
>> 
>> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/text/Net-HOWTO
> ...
> $ grep '[a-z0-9]Ethernet' Net-HOWTO
> |        root# route add -net 192.1Ethernetetmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
> ..

Upon further investigation, the problem is not related
to the processing of the document, but the errors are
within the source document (Net-HOWTO.sgml) itself. Example
(for the line listed above):

  <Para>
  <Screen>
      root# route add -net 192.1Ethernetetmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
  </Screen>
  </Para>

There is nothing I can do about that. It will require someone taking 
over the document and correcting the source itself. In the meantime,
we coul dmove it to the unmaintained list (Tabatha, can you do that
for us please?).

Question is: should we remove it from the site until someone steps 
forward to maintain it (and provides a corrected version)? 

regards,
-- 
Greg Ferguson / LDP volunteer
####@####.####

-----Original Message-----
From: G Ferguson / LDP 

>>> Please put the Net-HOWTO into the "unmaintained" section so that 
>>> someone can fix the corruption in the file?
>> 
>> I need more specifics. What is/was corrupted? I re-published it to 
>> see if there is any difference.
>> 
>> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/text/Net-HOWTO
> ...
> $ grep '[a-z0-9]Ethernet' Net-HOWTO
> |        root# route add -net 192.1Ethernetetmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
> ..

 

Question is: should we remove it from the site until someone steps 
forward to maintain it (and provides a corrected version)? 

-Greg Ferguson  

----End of Original Message ------------

Apart from technical details, the lines like:

" Was this section helpful? Why not Donate $2.50?" 

is too much irritating and gives a feeling of some fund raising stunt.

I too feel that such kind of articles should be removed from the
Mainstream TLDP Documents,corrected of all the mistakes
And then put back again.  Kindly move it to Unmaintained.


~Senthil


----
O.R.Senthil Kumaran
Engineer - Dell Product Group | BDC
OpenManage Product Test 
 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "G Ferguson / LDP" ####@####.####
> Question is: should we remove it from the site until someone steps
> forward to maintain it (and provides a corrected version)?

Why not just replace it with the prior version. This is obviously not a
properly reviewed upgrade. I personally don't agree with removing documents
unless replaced with something better.

I would take on this document except that I would be doing the work at home
where the family uses windows and I can't see how to edit or display docbook
on windows in the LDP author guide. I could edit in text but do need to be
able to display.

I also have concerns re the licensing in the manual
    Joshua Drake
    Copyright © 2000 Commandprompt, Inc
    v1.7.0, 29 December 2000

> > The author contact email is a dead address:
> >    ####@####.#### Joshua Drake.
>
> yes it is.

But you can find him at command prompt via this URL
http://www.commandprompt.com/

/Chris

On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 12:56:08PM -0400, Christopher Priest wrote:
> > > The author contact email is a dead address:
> > >    ####@####.#### Joshua Drake.
> But you can find him at command prompt via this URL
> http://www.commandprompt.com/

He did not reply to my email to him about this document.

-- 
-IAN!  Ian! D. Allen   Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
       EMail: ####@####.####   WWW: http://www.idallen.com/
       College professor (Linux) via: http://teaching.idallen.com/
       Support free and open public digital rights:  http://eff.org/