TFM isn’t worth the R. It doesn’t describe failure states or bugs in a way that a normal user understands or can work with. Either it works perfectly, or there’s basically no way to figure out exactly what went wrong and how.
The man pages would be so much less dry if they just put a few examples at the top. But nope. So I continue to curl cht.sh/tar until the heat death of the universe
I’ve been in the comments section once or twice. The solution was “RTFM.”
The good old ways. I miss them.
Nowadays, it’s more “User Manual? You mean the Manufacturer’s Opinion?”
TFM isn’t worth the R. It doesn’t describe failure states or bugs in a way that a normal user understands or can work with. Either it works perfectly, or there’s basically no way to figure out exactly what went wrong and how.
RTFM in this case means: Read the fucking man-page
Sometimes I get confused with man pages and have to go on other sites with different explanations and examples. Maybe that’s just me
No, that’s the state of documentation on Linux.
In OpenBSD, bad or lacking documentation is treated as a release-critical bug in the package.
The man pages would be so much less dry if they just put a few examples at the top. But nope. So I continue to
curl cht.sh/taruntil the heat death of the universeEdit: autocorrect