Live data from Hacker News

Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

lwn.net

91–100 of 131 posts

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#91
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After using FreeBSD and OpenBSD, it is frankly shocking how bad Linux documentation is in comparison. On the BSDs every command, every program, every system call, and every configuration file are thoroughly documented in man pages and other guides. The FreeBSD Handbook in particular is a treasure. It more than makes up for some of the more difficult aspects of the OS by providing thorough and approachable documentati…

It's a different model of development, leading to different expectations. BSD ties the kernel and the software on top of it together pretty heavily, creating the expectation that the documentation should cover all of it. Linux is meanwhile kernel and software kept separated, meaning that the documentation usually winds up assembled from separate tools, each with their own standards.

Yes, BSD is a single coherent system but so are many Linux distros. It's just that we've come to accept bad documentation as the norm for Linux-based tools. In my experience there's several types of problems that are very common for Linux tools:

* Extremely short documentation. Everyone has seen these, a tool where the man page exists but provides almost no actual information.

* Unfriendly reference-type documentation. GNU programs are often guilty of this, coreutils certainly comes to mind. On the upside, it's usually comprehensive. But it's not good - it's a short description followed by a sequential list of every option, so the functionality is described in detail but there are no usage examples, no list of the most common options, or anything like that. Great reference, poor usage documentation.

* Too much info about ancient systems or historical details. Yes, it's great that many of these utilities are portable and can run on different systems or work with files from different systems. The man pages for zip/unzip mention MS-DOS, Minix and Atari systems, while defining the zip format as "commonly found on MS-DOS systems". The man page for less explains that it's a program "similar to more(1)" - completely useless info now - and mentions that it has some support for hardcopy terminals, again information that's not important enough for the first paragraph in 2025.

* Poor keywords in the description. There's the theoretically useful apropos command. My Xorg wouldn't start so I tried to remember how to start my wifi up. apropos 'wlan|wi-fi|wifi|wireless' doesn't mention nmcli, which I was thinking of, though it does at least provide the much more difficult iw command.

* Technical project-specific jargon that makes it easy to find the solution - if you already know it, that is. For example, Xorg documentation generally doesn't use the word "resolution". It's not in the xrandr or Xserver man page, and in the xorg.conf page it's only a reference to virtual screens. Because X uses the term screen size. That's fine, understandable and even accurate but most people would first search for 'resolution'.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#92
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds worth reading. Is this the article you mean? https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Systemd

That's the systemd article, and this is the forum post explaining why arch moved to systemd: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1149530#p1149530

https://archive.is/Mi9DP

Scroll down to the long post by tomegun.

I kinda get the animosity now. I wasn't really using Linux at the time, but if I was, and my system was running great, and then I had a list of complicated instructions I had to perform to change my init system... I'd probably be peeved off.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#93
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember long before I started using Arch I would google something nuanced for Ubuntu and there it was on the Arch Linux wiki with a “for Ubuntu users do this” section to fix whatever my issue was, this happened multiple times.

The special instructions for other distros could be at risk for being deleted, as "something that will not work on Arch as-is is not something we will be hosting on our site".

Feels like someone needs to make a generic Linux wiki then.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#94
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Instead of creating multiple wikis with probably 80% of duplicate information between them >why not try to turn it into a shared project? This is basically both the highlight and the bane of the Linux world. Why have another DE when there are already multiple ones? [0] Why have another package manager when there are already multiple ones? [1] Why have another distro when there are already multiple ones? [2] So havin…

Bane? It's what makes the Linux desktop great. I get to choose a system that works like I want. Imagine if there was only Gnome or whatever unholy monstrosity is the most popular DE these days.

If there were only one, someone would launch a new one within a week. Just how Linux is.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#95
post #19

Instead of creating multiple wikis with probably 80% of duplicate information between them, it would be great to have a cross distribution wiki with separate sections for distribution-specific instructions where it makes sense. Gentoo had a fantastic wiki before they lost it to disk array failure (IIRC) around ten years ago, now pretty much everyone is going to the Arch wiki, why not try to turn it into a shared proj…

>Instead of creating multiple wikis with probably 80% of duplicate information between them >why not try to turn it into a shared project? This is basically both the highlight and the bane of the Linux world. Why have another DE when there are already multiple ones? [0] Why have another package manager when there are already multiple ones? [1] Why have another distro when there are already multiple ones? [2] So havin…

>Why make a green bikeshed when there's already a red bikeshed?

Because then you have two bikesheds. An important aspect of the fact that the bikeshed exists, as a separate entity not integrated with the house, is that you can choose a different one. Specifically, the one that's already painted the way you want.

Maybe you don't think this is a feature in your current circumstance. Others do, which is why it persists.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#97
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be even better - just a single, unified distro. Imagine if all those man-hours where actually focused on delivering a single working and polished FOSS OS. I know, FOSS is all about choice, yada yada.

Then you get to handle all the same criticisms that are usually lobbed at MS Office: no single user ever needs more than 15% of the functionality, but still receives the additional baggage of the other 85% -- whether in terms of memory footprint, reduced performance or UI clutter. The ability of FOSS to be optimized for specific use cases is one of its biggest strengths, and that has nothing to do with "choice" itsel…

Except that a lot of FOSS ends up pulling in huge dependencies to use tiny parts of them, doesn't tree-shake (granted not all languages make this easy), vendors a specific version of something you already have that would work fine, etc.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#98
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After using FreeBSD and OpenBSD, it is frankly shocking how bad Linux documentation is in comparison. On the BSDs every command, every program, every system call, and every configuration file are thoroughly documented in man pages and other guides. The FreeBSD Handbook in particular is a treasure. It more than makes up for some of the more difficult aspects of the OS by providing thorough and approachable documentati…

Linux != software that runs on Linux. Those are two completely different things.

I don’t think anyone is confused about this. Linux is a shorthand for the family of Unix like operating systems that use Linux as the kernel. The only ambiguity in this shorthand is if android or chrome os are being referenced, but it’s pretty clear from context that they are not relevant to the discussion.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are a dime a dozen. Jet non of them has any significant share in the pure wiki space

Name a few of them.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=markdown+based+wiki

People can't name them off the top of their heads, exactly because none of them have caught on. But they're easy to find.

Re: Arch shares its wiki strategy with Debian

#100
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The special instructions for other distros could be at risk for being deleted, as "something that will not work on Arch as-is is not something we will be hosting on our site".

Feels like someone needs to make a generic Linux wiki then.

The arch wiki could expand to support distro switching, with each distro having its own domain, and all that could link back to a general linux wiki. It'd be beautiful.
Post reply on HN