[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Why don't we start a linux-kernel guide ?
It could include current Documentation, with special sections for kernel
A bit ala Kernel Hacker Guide, but with up to date information.
I'm wondering if I'm the only one who thinks it could be a good idea?
Guylhem Aznar, Linux Documentation Project: http://www.linuxdoc.org
PGP key: http://oeil.qc.ca/~guylhem ; Email: guylhem \@/ oeil.qc.ca
"They who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Guylhem Aznar <email@example.com>
- Subject: text
- From: Drew Endacott <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:22:26 -0600 (EST)
- In-reply-to: <19991130004040.B1213@victis.oeil.qc.ca>
Dear Guylhem Aznar--
I guess I get the message. The whole point of my offer was the
The existing kernel documentation, books, list groups, are
inadequate. I say this not as an expert but rather echoeing two
experts who have tried to use Linux in their research.
The only way these two physics professors see Linux advancing
into mainstream scientific use-- as opposed to user-level
applications-- is for the kernel to be documented to the same
level as commercially-developed flavors of Unix. SGI, Cray,
whatever name you chose to use, these companies include technical
documentation people in every phase of the product's development.
These document people are literally required NOT to understand
the product to the level of the "techies." A measure of success
is when the "techies" agree that the documentation adequately
explains things. Not to other "techies" since they know what is
going on, but instead to knowledgeable "non-techies."
This is the Great Weakness of Linux. I had hoped to contribute
but it appears this is not to be. A mere rewrite of existing
documentation will not solve the problem.
--- End Message ---