On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 15:30 +0200, Александър Л. Димитров wrote:
> On 23:51 Tue 17 Jul, Thufir wrote:
> > Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
> > maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
>
> I guess you missed it. `info grub' says (*Note chainloading)
[snip]
> Note that it's usually better to refer to the info command for more
> serious documentation about GNU tools in general. RMS and his guys don't
> exactly seem to like manpages that much that's what they have info for.
> They have their point, but that's another flame war ;-)
I'm happy to leave the info vs man flamewar for someone else, but what I
_don't_ like is when you have both man and info, and one of them is very
deficient (in grub's case, man). The description is different, less
informative, and quite misleading. Instead, is should say either
nothing but "refer to info pages"; or it should be the same as the info
pages...
would anyone agree?
--
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>
The trouble was that he was talking in philosophy, but they were
listening in gibberish.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
