On 4/2/25 9:32 AM, Peter Ehlert wrote:
try here:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/network-manager-applet
That page tries to load. Evidently doesn't like my configuration of
SeaMonkey. Doesn't surprise me as I've got a strange configuration.
However Debian's default configuration of Firefox has
On 4/2/25 8:41 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
I am running Debian 12.8 with MATE 1.26.0 .
When right-clicking on the Network Manager icon's "About" button it
identifies itself as version 1.30.0 .
There is a link to http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/ which
results in a 404 error.
I have
On 2025-04-03 01:57, Charles Curley wrote:
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 05:34:35 +0800
Bret Busby wrote:
The version of the applet in my taskbar, shows as 1.24.0 (copyrighted
to Red Hat,and I believe that I have not used Red hat, since v6.0),
from the About item in the menu, running on Mate
Synaptic sh
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 05:34:35 +0800
Bret Busby wrote:
> The version of the applet in my taskbar, shows as 1.24.0 (copyrighted
> to Red Hat,and I believe that I have not used Red hat, since v6.0),
> from the About item in the menu, running on Mate
>
> Synaptic shows my version of Network Manager, a
On 3/4/25 04:00, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
Richard Owlett wrote:
I am running Debian 12.8 with MATE 1.26.0 .
When right-clicking on the Network Manager icon's "About" button it
identifies itself as version 1.30.0 .
I've also just noticed that NM 1.30 belongs on an older release of
Deb
Richard Owlett wrote:
> I am running Debian 12.8 with MATE 1.26.0 .
> When right-clicking on the Network Manager icon's "About" button it
> identifies itself as version 1.30.0 .
I've also just noticed that NM 1.30 belongs on an older release of
Debian than 12.
On 2/4/25 21:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
I am running Debian 12.8 with MATE 1.26.0 .
When right-clicking on the Network Manager icon's "About" button it
identifies itself as version 1.30.0 .
There is a link to http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/ which
results in a 404 error.
I have qu
Richard Owlett wrote:
> I am running Debian 12.8 with MATE 1.26.0 .
> When right-clicking on the Network Manager icon's "About" button it
> identifies itself as version 1.30.0 .
> There is a link to http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/
> which results in a 404 error.
I think the link sh
try here:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/network-manager-applet
On 4/2/25 06:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
I am running Debian 12.8 with MATE 1.26.0 .
When right-clicking on the Network Manager icon's "About" button it
identifies itself as version 1.30.0 .
There is a link to http://www.gnome.org/pr
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:43 AM Hans wrote:
> Maybe the op wqould like to test aqemu, which is a graphical frontend for
> qemu
> and it might be easier for him to configure.
>
> In the comparision of aqemu (with using kvm) and VirtualkBox and
> Virt-Manager
> my feeling was, Virtualbox the slowes
Maybe the op wqould like to test aqemu, which is a graphical frontend for qemu
and it might be easier for him to configure.
In the comparision of aqemu (with using kvm) and VirtualkBox and Virt-Manager
my feeling was, Virtualbox the slowest and both Aqemu and VirtManager faster.
The latter two
2023-11-06 12:45 GMT+05:00, Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d...@ewoof.net>:
> The three biggest differences I have run across (I used VirtualBox
> before):
>
> 1. Storage pools for disk images. With VirtualBox, you can put a disk
> image file anywhere. With KVM, they go into one of a defined set of
> po
On 6 Nov 2023 01:58 -0500, from noloa...@gmail.com (Jeffrey Walton):
> QEMU/KVM is mostly like Virtual Box. If you know Virtual Box, then you
> have most of what you need for QEMU/KVM.
I agree. Although _some_ terminology differs, and naturally things are
organized somewhat differently in the UI,
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:36 AM Rick Thomas wrote:
>
> Can anyone recommend good documentation on KVM/QEMU that would allow me to
> get up to speed on it quickly?
I don't know if or where good documentation exists. Sorry about that.
QEMU/KVM is mostly like Virtual Box. If you know Virtual Box, t
Hi Tom,
Ah, if you'd said some or all of that previously, you might have had a
slightly politer response - sorry if I was grumpy. Please _DON'T_ drop back
to Stretch: with the final release, it's just transitioned to LTS. That
transition means that it will still be well supported for security issu
Folks,
I put my email on the list because I was hoping that someone knew of
documentation which Google had missed. I also had read the items provided
by Google at ArchLinux and the other sites.
After reading your replies, I put sddm on another of my machines, which is
running Stretch. The result
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 11:39 +0100, Tixy wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 01:54 -0700, tom arnall wrote:
> > is there any?
> >
> > the issue i'm dealing with is creating avatars on the login screen.
> > i'm running debian buster with the LXQt desktop.,
>
> And the hits from Googling 'sddm avatar' ar
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 01:54 -0700, tom arnall wrote:
> is there any?
>
> the issue i'm dealing with is creating avatars on the login screen.
> i'm running debian buster with the LXQt desktop.,
And the hits from Googling 'sddm avatar' aren't any good?
The top 3 hits in Google gives me the Arch wi
C.T.F. Jansen wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Where is documentation that describes the messages from gufw or ufw please.
>
> Of particular interest are lines in syslog and journalctl output with
>
> UFW AUDIT
>
> in them. What does this mean ?
> There are queries on the Ubun
On Fri 11 May 2018 at 07:40:44 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 05/11/2018 06:50 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >When I search man-pages.debian.org I get only a page in Chinese(?).
> >The best hit I get doing a web search is
> > [http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/html/x1712.htm]
> >T
On 05/11/2018 06:50 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
When I search man-pages.debian.org I get only a page in Chinese(?).
The best hit I get doing a web search is
[http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/html/x1712.htm]
There is a plethora questions/answers, but too narrowly focused.
They do di
On 2018-05-11 at 07:50, Richard Owlett wrote:
> When I search man-pages.debian.org I get only a page in Chinese(?).
> The best hit I get doing a web search is
> [http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/html/x1712.htm]
> There is a plethora questions/answers, but too narrowly focused.
> T
On Fri, 11 May 2018, Richard Owlett wrote:
When I search man-pages.debian.org I get only a page in Chinese(?).
The best hit I get doing a web search is
[http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/html/x1712.htm]
There is a plethora questions/answers, but too narrowly focused.
They do displa
Hi,
> Suggestions?
https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Bash-History-Builtins.html
and
man bash
To find the description of the command "history", use search expression:
/history \[n\]
The man page is full of details about the "history" as concept and
how to use it, quite
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 06:50:02AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> When I search man-pages.debian.org I get only a page in Chinese(?).
> The best hit I get doing a web search is
> [http://www.tldp.org/LDP/GNU-Linux-Tools-Summary/html/x1712.htm]
> There
Woodchuck wrote:
> Save an old man a few days of reading the GFDL flame wars from
> seven years ago, and someone (one) just kindly say where this "non-free"
> documentation is.
Package "gcc-doc"? Or is that too obvious?
http://ftp.uk.debian.org stable/non-free gcc-doc-base 4.4.4.nf1-1 [30.1kB
> OK, so gcc documentation is "unfree". I have no dog in that fight.
>
> Save an old man a few days of reading the GFDL flame wars from
> seven years ago, and someone (one) just kindly say where this "non-free"
> documentation is.
http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/gcc-doc-base
and
http://package
Hey guys, I know you're trying to drag as many people as possible into
this project, and its great, but maybe there should be a cap on the
cross-posting. I think most of us that are interested either already
have, or will subscribe to debian-doc. Meanwhile, those of us who
already have made the mo
Douglas Allan Tutty said...
> Answering this myself, it seems that wikis are flat in that all pages
> are under the one main wiki, but any page can reference any other page.
It depends on the wiki. I use PmWiki[1], both as a wiki and a
development platform for web apps, and it has a number of
CC'd to debian-user
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 22:34:21 -
marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Douglas Allan Tutty said...
>
> > If we went with a wiki, we could have one long page for our project
>
> What's the benefit of doing that?
I'm not sure what Doug meant by that, but I was thinking of a main
CC'd to debian-user
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 18:06:13 -0500
Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 05:14:47PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:24:35PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:14:43 -0500
> > > > Dougl
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 05:14:47PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:24:35PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > > On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:14:43 -0500
> > > Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > So what about novicedoc as a project title?
> > > >
> >
Douglas Allan Tutty said...
> If we went with a wiki, we could have one long page for our project
What's the benefit of doing that?
> with sub-projects as separate chapters. We can follow the same layout
> as a debiandoc e.g. release under GPL, Abstract, TOC, then the chapters.
Chapters are go
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 02:49:00PM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:24:35PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:14:43 -0500
> > Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > So what about novicedoc as a project title?
> > >
> > > I don't
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:24:35PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:14:43 -0500
> Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So what about novicedoc as a project title?
> >
> > I don't know what all questions alioth asks when one registers a
> > project, but for a sho
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:14:43 -0500
Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 08:51:42PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:28:56 -0500
> > Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I need to look around further at alioth but I _think
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:28:56 -0500
Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 08:09:39PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:05:27 -0500
> > Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 10:46:47AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECT
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 08:09:39PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:05:27 -0500
> Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 10:46:47AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> We could start a project on alioth. We can setup a repository,
> mailinglist, and
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 11:58:11 -0500
Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as these discussions go, we should probably move to debian-doc
> since this discussion isn't about, directly, solving users' problems.
> What say ye? If this seems reasonable, let me know and I'll post this
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:05:27 -0500
Douglas Allan Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 10:46:47AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:16:58AM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > > If we went with a non-wiki format then we need a home.
> >
> > A h
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 10:46:47AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:16:58AM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > If we went with a non-wiki format then we need a home.
>
> A home on which to develop? or a home on which to publish?
> With a distributed revision control
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 03:00:05PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> >If we were to have a page clearly labled as GPL, would you be able to
> >spit out an html of a wiki page any beter than we could pull off with a
> >browser?
>
> I'm not quite sure what you mean. The wiki pa
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:58:16AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 05:30:10PM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > Hi all,
>
> > I have also been subscribed to the debian-doc list which is extremly low
> > volume (probably a symptom of why we're having to have this whole
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 03:28:36PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I'm in favour of using an open standard for our definitive file
format. The obvious one is docbook, since that is used by other
Debian documentation. We should at l
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 03:28:36PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >[...]
> >
> >
> >I'm in favour of using an open standard for our definitive file
> >format. The obvious one is docbook, since that is used by other
> >Debian documentation. We should at least confirm to
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:16:58AM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> I'm concerned about the newbiedoc wiki:
> Its server is sometimes unavailable, so we can't get the debian
> www people to add a link.
>
> As a whole its GFDL although we could do our page GPL.
>
> I'm c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I'm in favour of using an open standard for our definitive file
format. The obvious one is docbook, since that is used by other
Debian documentation. We should at least confirm to applicable
international standards. We'd still need a mechanism (preferably
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 05:30:10PM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We've got lots of ideas flowing. Rather than reponding to each post (I
> was away for one day and there's a lot on this thread), I'll try to
> repond from my perspective to some of the points. In no particular
> o
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
I'm concerned about the newbiedoc wiki:
Its server is sometimes unavailable, so we can't get the debian
www people to add a link.
As a whole its GFDL although we could do our page GPL.
Providing that we are not going to duplicate ef
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 06:16:47AM +, Chris Lale wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 06:19:00PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
>
Osamu Aoki edits the Debian Reference etc. This is another possible
model for Doug's ideas. Th
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 06:16:47AM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> >On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 06:19:00PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
>
> Osamu Aoki edits the Debian Reference etc. This is another possible
> model for Doug's ideas. There are many contributors but the editor
I'm concerned about the newbiedoc wiki:
Its server is sometimes unavailable, so we can't get the debian
www people to add a link.
As a whole its GFDL although we could do our page GPL.
I'm concerned about the debian wiki:
The front page is immutable due to
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 06:19:00PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
Sounds like exactly what I had in mind, and seems like a pretty good
battle plan for jumping into the documentation. What format will the
document be written in initially, plain text? I figure if we d
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
[...] as I understand it,
newbiedoc as a whole is unable to change its licence to GPL from GFDL to
make it possible to just migrate it to wiki.debian.org.
Is may not be possible just to merge projects like this. You may find it
easier to work within an existing
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 06:43:08PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 06:19:00PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
> >
> > Sounds like exactly what I had in mind, and seems like a pretty good
> > battle plan for jumping into the documentation. What format will the
> > document
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 06:19:00PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
>
> Sounds like exactly what I had in mind, and seems like a pretty good
> battle plan for jumping into the documentation. What format will the
> document be written in initially, plain text? I figure if we do plain
> text initially
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> [...]
>
>
> How does this sound?
>
> Doug.
>
Sounds like exactly what I had in mind, and seems like a pretty good
battle plan for jumping into the documentation. What format will the
document be written in initially, plain text? I figure if we do plain
text initially
Thank you all for your help.
The combination doc-base + dwww (or dhelp) is exactly what I was looking for.
How come there is no mention to 'doc-base' in the Debian reference or
the Debian FAQ? It seems a pretty useful tool :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "un
Ralph Katz wrote:
On 11/05/2006 08:50 AM, Dani wrote:
Hi all,
Is there any console tool that allows the user to access easily to the
documentation of any package? For example, if I am working with
python-matplotlib (a matlab-like python plotting system) and I want to
read its main documentat
On 11/05/2006 08:50 AM, Dani wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is there any console tool that allows the user to access easily to the
> documentation of any package? For example, if I am working with
> python-matplotlib (a matlab-like python plotting system) and I want to
> read its main documentation, already
Hello Dani.
> Is there any console tool that allows the user to access easily to the
> documentation of any package?
Maybe dwww is what you are searching for:
> Description: Read all on-line documentation with a WWW browser
> All installed on-line documentation will be served via a local HTTP
>
Try dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorgAs for documentation...I'm not quite sure.And from my experience, xorg.conf is the same as XF86Config-4.On 6/21/06,
Johannes Wiedersich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've recently upgraded from sarge to etch. Everything worked more orless painlessly. However I would l
Hello
Iwan van der Kleyn (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> I just got a new laptop, an Acer Aspire 1522WLMi. After installing
> Sarge (kernel 2.6) with the rc of the debian installer, essentials
> parts of the system work flawlessly and I can get my work done.
> However, looking at /etc/modules, I f
On 05/18/04 09:00, Ashwin Raikar wrote:
Hi Paul ,
Thanks for the info . But How do I correlate the information
available
On debain site site with that of the embedded debain . Is there are materail
available
That tells you what's the embedded debain architecture ,CPU Architecture
Support
ssage-
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 12:00 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Documentation
Ashwin Raikar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can somebody help me find some documentation related to embedded
> debian .\
Have you tried
Ashwin Raikar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can somebody help me find some documentation related to embedded
> debian .\
Have you tried http://debian.org/ ? The search may be of help for
you. You might also try searching google with the last keyword being
site:debian.org
--
Paul Johnson
<[EMA
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 03:02:30 -0300, Cristian Gutierrez wrote:
>
> This seems to be partly due to the nature of issues' contexts.
>
> You have trouble with XFree, then you post relevant parts of
> /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 and /var/log/XFree86.0.log (you are usually
> specifically asked for this fil
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:48:08PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>
> Hopefully I didn't snip too much and get toasted because of it.
Hmm...
>
> Here is my proposed solution:
>
> Only allow completely documented packages in stable. Other packages can
> go to "non-free" or "Experts Only" or some
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:48:08PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Pigeon wrote:
> >It's the result of people providing facilities because they want to, and
>
> I think this may summarize my point(?). For those of you that have
> expertise with Debian, it must be a no brainier to grab a package a
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> My argument is that as a noobie, I have access to packages that are not
> well documented though the main distribution.
>
STOP ME BEFORE I APT-GET AGAIN
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/
--
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 20:48:08 -0600
Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pigeon wrote:
> > It's the result of people providing facilities because they want to,
> > and are free to do it in the way that they want to. Most
> > authors/maintainers of free software provide documentation. Some do
>
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 08:48:08PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Here is my proposed solution:
>
> Only allow completely documented packages in stable. Other packages can
> go to "non-free" or "Experts Only" or some other name that will warn the
> users caution is warrented.
>
> This solution W
Pigeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>But the "visible output" from the Windoze communities is of much
>>>lower quality. Googling for an answer to some Windoze problem rarely
>>>turns up much in the way of a useful result. With Linux, you tend to
>>>get more results than you can shake a stick at..
Pigeon wrote:
It's the result of people providing facilities because they want to, and are
free to do it in the way that they want to. Most authors/maintainers of free
software provide documentation. Some do it better than others. One or two
can't be bothered to provide any, and users of their pack
Pigeon wrote:
All very true. But there is also the fact that you can't get in touch with
the developers and maintainers, or if you can, much of their knowledge is
locked away behind "commercial confidentiality" and the like.
Which brings to mind "*The Cluetrain Manifesto:
The End of Business as
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:02:30AM -0300, Cristian Gutierrez wrote:
> Anonymous coward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> >>John Hasler wrote:
> >>>Kevin Mark writes:
> >>>
> compare what you get from the windows world. no commun
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 04:01:07PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Pigeon wrote:
> >But why should they be deprived of the opportunity to use it simply because
> >others can't figure out how to? Sure, it's tough on those who can't figure
> >it out, but that's no reason to make life hard for those who
On 2004-01-19, Paul E Condon penned:
> I a newbie. I've been using Debian about 4y, but I'm a slow learner.
> I picked up on this thread because the topic of helping newbies is
> particularly dear to me. But I didn't notice its beginning. So, I
> decided to look at it in the archives, and I need so
Paul E Condon wrote:
I a newbie. I've been using Debian about 4y, but I'm a slow learner.
I picked up on this thread because the topic of helping newbies is
particularly dear to me. But I didn't notice its beginning. So, I
decided to look at it in the archives, and I need some help.
I cut and pa
I a newbie. I've been using Debian about 4y, but I'm a slow learner.
I picked up on this thread because the topic of helping newbies is
particularly dear to me. But I didn't notice its beginning. So, I
decided to look at it in the archives, and I need some help.
I cut and pasted the subject line
On 2004-01-19, Richard Lyons penned:
> On Monday 19 January 2004 05:27, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>>
>> I was sick this weekend, which meant I sat around the house all
>> weekend with my also-sick fiance rather than going skiing or mountain
>> biking on a gorgeous weekend. So, here's one vote for c
On Monday 19 January 2004 05:27, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On 2004-01-18, Mac McCaskie penned:
> > ROFLOL,
> >
> > Richard Lyons wrote:
> >> But this has been a bad week for tempers here. Quite a few rants and
> >> upsets. Has anyone else wondered if it's seasonal? Subject for a
> >> little pap
Anonymous coward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>>John Hasler wrote:
>>>Kevin Mark writes:
>>>
compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no
help. need to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
>>
>>This is a
On 2004-01-18, Mac McCaskie penned:
> ROFLOL,
>
> Richard Lyons wrote:
>
>> But this has been a bad week for tempers here. Quite a few rants and
>> upsets. Has anyone else wondered if it's seasonal? Subject for a
>> little paper, perhaps? SUBTLE - Seasonal Usenet Bad Temper Loss
>> Episodes...
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> Paul Morgan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>>
>> So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I
>> can understand and use simply because the documentation is not
>> adequate enough for you, or for someb
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
>> On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>>
>>>I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
>>>without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
>>>
>>>Where is the value of providing a widget to
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
>> Do you really consider basic etiquette to be a debian-specific "bow
>> down and scrape" requirement?
>>
>
> I consider "basic etiquette" to be very benificial when asking for
> advice AND when giving it. It is my hope that th
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 20:37:27 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>
> The obvious solution to this quandry, would be to put the URL in the man
> page if the page applied to that implementation. Shouldn't that be easy
> to do? (but it does leave out those poor unfortunates that do not have
> internet
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:32:49 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Paul Morgan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>>
>> So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I can
>> understand and use simply because the documentation is not adequate enough
>>
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 04:01:07PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> >But why should they be deprived of the opportunity to use it simply because
> >others can't figure out how to? Sure, it's tough on those who can't figure
> >it out, but that's no reason to make life hard for those who can.
>
> This a
But why should they be deprived of the opportunity to use it simply because
others can't figure out how to? Sure, it's tough on those who can't figure
it out, but that's no reason to make life hard for those who can.
This agruement contradicts itself.
On the one hand it is stated plainly about the
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
> >Kevin Mark writes:
> >
> >>compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no help. need
> >>to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
>
> This is an outright falsehood. There are just as many,
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:32:49PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Paul Morgan wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> >
> >So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I can
> >understand and use simply because the documentation is not adequate enou
On Saturday 17 January 2004 2:22 pm, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> If there's a package that will solve a problem for me, I would rather
> have it available without any documentation at all than have it
> completely unavailable due to lack of documentation.
Amen, I actually find I get better support
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:40:30PM -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
> If I write a better manual for some mid-level utility like xfe, no one but
> the xfe developer is likely to ever realize it, despite the fact that xfe is
> quite good.
Xfe is quite good, but I wish the problem with how slow it scrolls wh
Bijan Soleymani writes:
> If they're doing it for professional purposes then they can afford to
> spend a lot of time figuring it out on their own.
Quite the opposite. However what they _can_ afford is paid technical
support. And it is available.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse H
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
> without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
> Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without
> giving them a clue a
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:23:37 -0600, Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> rigid? not hardly, I am asking everyone to be less rigid on what
> the noobies must to do. It should not be asked of them to bow down
> and scrape in order to gain admission into the great and sacred
> learning hall.
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 10:34:47PM -0600, Jacob S. wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:04:48 -0500
> Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I repeat what I implied before: Debian isn't for beginners who want
> > hand-holding. There are plenty of distributions that specifically do
> > supply just
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:04:48 -0500
Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:21:13PM -0600, Jacob S. wrote:
>
> > There's one more point I'm surprised nobody's mentioned yet. The
> > documentation for the "other" operating system.
>
> Jacob, comparing yourself to Windows
1 - 100 of 214 matches
Mail list logo
