I do read. I read a lot. (I wish my eyes were young again... I'd read more.) What I dislike is having to wade through a description of any particular command to "gather up" any pre-reqs or co-reqs.
For example, let's take the "fsck" command: Switch -s has a relationship to switches -p, -a, and -n. The switch -t has a relationship with -A. Switch -A has a relationship is -P and perhaps -R. Honestly, unless you can read the ENTIRE man page for fsck and discern ALL the nuances between the various switches... Well, the mind reels. The layout of railroad tracks is not a substitution for reading the manual, it's an aid in understanding. Good doc is crystal clear and unambiguous. More off-topic: It would be interesting to hear from IBM on how screen-readers (for the blind) cope with railroad tracks. -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 11:10 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: Linux and Railroad Diagrams On Jan 31, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Peter Webb, Toronto Transit Commission wrote: > Amen. I completely agree. $ man foobar The documentation for the command foobar has been moved into the GNU info system. Please consult it instead. $ info foobar RTFM $ Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
