• Postimo@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    The idea that manuals in linux are a good way to learn and understand new software is peak linux neckbeard bs, and I will die on this hill. I congratulate OP on the exact type of autism that lets them feel this is an effective and useful method for learning new software, but if there is desire to have a greater adoption of linux maybe its bad to be snarky at folks for not instantly understand the terminal based documentation conventions of some dudes in the 70s. Maybe an alphabetical* list of all possible options is okay for referencing or searching, but is objectively insane way to learn or understand a problem.

    • bluecat_OwO@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      initially when I was learning linux. I had troubles finding the command I needed. I could have first gone and read everything and then come back to try, which I did. But sometimes the man pages, the ubuntu and arch forums weren’t as great of a help as messing up myself.

      Could there be a better way to document with slightly more examples: yes. Would it help: tons

      But this is just my opinion, and I am just a noob

    • Rooty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Name calls people who read documentation.

      Does not offer any alternative.

      “No John, you are the neckbeards!”

    • 𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      as a professional sociotechnical problem solver I will join you on this fatal hill

      like take the 4 types of documentation in diátaxis

      man pages usually fulfill the reference need, and sometimes kind of that of how-to guides if you’re lucky and your local man has examples

      but that leaves more than 50% of documentation needs lacking

      and discoverability is atrocious – you have to already know that the command (or commands) you need exists and what it’s called

      one of the most useful things I learned in a linux sysadmin course was apropos / man -k, which lets you search installed man pages by keyword. but hardly anyone else seems to know about it – I only learned of it because a teaching assistant mentioned it off hand! – and even then it only helps if you guess the right keyword for your problem

      I am vexed by this situation

      • bufalo1973@europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I think it should be the default if you don’t use parameters. A little usage help and the list of commands (with a “do you want to see the list of commands? (Y/n)” message)

    • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 hours ago

      There’s other ways to get info. And man pages are a great way to learn how something is expected to work on your system. And it’s offline, without ads, scams, ai generated false info.

    • tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      THIS. I feel like linux man pages are as useful as an Analytical mechanics textbook for someone who just wants to drive. Like yes, sure, it’s amazing we have such a detailed documentation but for God’s sake just introduce basic usages first

    • Noxy@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      ssh connects and logs into the specified destination, which may be specified as either [user@]hostname or a URI of the form ssh://[user@]hostname[:port]

      ssh [admin@]192.168.1.1
      ssh: Could not resolve hostname ]192.168.1.1: No address associated with hostname
      

      That’s how I would interpret that part of the man page had I no familiarity with ssh. It doesn’t seem reasonable to expect the reader to know what those brackets mean.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        You get to learn the notation conventions with <> and [] fairly early on. Maybe a very new user would make that mistake. If he doesn’t get it fairly quick, maybe computers aren’t for him.

      • tomkatt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        13 hours ago

        You might be thinking of info pages. The man pages are just the instructions, feature flags, etc. generally, while info (when available) usually has a more general / layman description of the command with examples.

        • obrien_must_suffer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Hrm, I checked the manpage for grep on my Mac an there are a number of examples. I checked it on Linux and there’s one example. I must be spoiled by the BSD’s.

          • tomkatt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 hours ago

            It’s possible. A lot of things merge the info and man pages now if both are installed, that could be the case here. Or Mac just documents it further.

    • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      It’s a good thing there are other resources, then. You can read tldr-pages. You can look at various official and unofficial wikis. You can look at Stackoverflow. You can look at Youtube tutorials. You can ask other people. Hell, you can ask a chatbot.

      If the average user is unwilling to do that, maybe it’s better that Linux does not see a wider adoption.

      • is the fact that people can with effort and error figure out how to do something a reason not to make it easier for them to do?

        I mean

        you can in theory write multi-threaded bug-free C code – just read the docs and the specs and the source of your libs and never ever do something that seems to work but is subtly fatally incorrect

        and yet we still have golang and rust and many other options to do things more safely and easily

        if someone wants to use Linux but doesn’t want to memorize the Hundred Mandatory Commands and Thousand Flags lest they accidentally cat > /dev/sda, why shouldn’t there be a system for them?

        • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          The community abhors change. Especially changes that break conventions, even informal ones. Look at the temper tantrums people are throwing because Wayland does things differently from X.org. Changing output redirection in Bash, or how dd works, or any number of long-standing conventions because new users are unwilling to adapt to a new system and might end up dding over the root partition would break established workflows, and worse, existing scripts and services.

          But the solution already exists, it’s called wrapper programs. You don’t have to manually update AUR packages because yay and paru already do that. You don’t have to figure out how fdisk and mkfs work because Gparted and Partition Manager do it for you.

          Nevertheless, using a system should always and forever be the user’s responsibility. Otherwise Linux would turn into a locked-down play pen like Apple products.