Subject: Linux-Activists - NORMAL Channel digest. 94-1-5-19:35
From: "Linux Activists" <[email-masked]>
To: "Linux-Activists" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 1994 02:47:28 +0200

Topics:
	 double-0.1 bug
	 Re: LDP documentation and the FSF

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Jean Marc Verbavatz)
Subject: double-0.1 bug
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 1994 19:24:26 +0200

There is a MAJOR bug in the double-0.1 (fs independent on-the-fly compression)
device driver when more than one device is opened.

****  DO NOT USE DOUBLE-0.1 WITH MORE THAN ONE DEVICE  ****
In addition, you should not mount a device after having used
a different one without rebooting.

I have found the reason for that bug, and I will fix it as quickly as
possible (Watch for double-0.2 on sunsite and tsx-11).

Sorry for the inconvenience and many thanks to the folks helping me
improve it.

					Jean-Marc Verbavatz
					<[email-masked]>

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: LDP documentation and the FSF
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 1994 20:48:26 +0200

[email-masked] (Olaf Kirch) writes:
> Although GNU utils make up a major part of "Linux" utilities, I
> would like to see both projects cooperate, rather than view one
> as part of the other. But maybe I'm just misinterpreting your
> interpretation of what RMS said :-)

No, he didn't want to deny the fact that Linux is its own entity. He
simply meant that what we're doing with Linux is also a major goal
of the GNU project, and that we could sync up so that our efforts
will eventually help each other. I see no problem with that.

> So, it _is_ already used in non-Linux environments. Therefore, I've had
> an eye on it that I keep Linuxisms from being cluttered all over the book,
> and to concentrate them in a few locations instead. This works 
> well most of the time.

You could simply isolate the Linux-related stuff in some way (encase it
in separate source files, macros, etc.) so that the book can easily
be generalized if need be. You could just turn it into a general book
on network administration, freely distributable, and keep a Linux-specific
version for the LDP.

> However, there's one problem about my book, and other administration-
> related books like Lars' SAG probably as well: scale. When writing the
> NAG, I had in mind the audience at which we originally targeted it,
> namely the former-DOS addict turned Unix admin. That is, the environments
> and examples discussed tend to lean much more toward the typical PC
> environment than the fifteen workstation-LAN you find at average
> Unix installations.

That's the same "problem" with the I&GS. In order for our work to fit in
well with the GNU stuff, we may need to keep in mind the audience that
is already UNIX users. I'm doing this for the new book, and (in fact)
it's much easier to write that way. The I&GS needs to be for PC as well
as UNIX users, but the others...? We could assume that they'd be reading
the NAG after understanding something of UNIX and Linux, so that you
wouldn't have to do too much hand-holding.

The other option is to produce GNU versions of the books (in texinfo) with
that audience in mind, and keep the LDP as-is for MS-DOS and PC users.
But I have the feeling that soon, the primary Linux audience won't be
MS-DOS users.

> Nevertheless, I am not sure if anyone would really want to have
> the LDP docs in texinfo. I don't know if manuals are really
> suitable for turning into hypertext stuff.

Well... I'm no texinfo user myself, but apparently many people find it
useful, and I have had many comments from readers that texinfo would
be nice. 

> Info is good for
> reference-type documentation, but not for tutorials.

RMS would strongly disagree with you... his feeling is that the GNU manuals
are both a tutorial and a reference. He said that this was hard to do,
but they have been successful with it in the past. (And what he means
by "reference" is quite general---essentially, the "reference" boils down
to a good menu structure and topic index, not necessarily man-page like
information). I think he's right about that, though---that's why texinfo
is able to produce printed docs as well as hypertext. 

> Just compare
> what the NAG feels like in texinfo (there should be an old version
> of it lying around on ftp.stolaf.edu) to what it feels like when
> browsing the DVI file online. A tutorial has lots of context;
> often the main thread of dicussion continues across several
> subsections; a hypertext document needs to have the context set
> up at each node.

That is a point, but I think you can get away with it if you use
cross-references well.

------------------------------

End of NORMAL Digest
********************
-------