[SGVLUG] Linux and then SCO !

[Terry Hancock]

On Wednesday 31 August 2005 03:53 pm, David Lawyer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 09:32:36AM -0700, Emerson, Tom wrote:
> > > Behalf Of David Lawyer
> > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 08:00:09AM -0700, Tom Emerson wrote:
> > > >      http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
> > > I didn't think this was very good.  The author is just too dogmatic.
> > 
> > Do you have a better set of guidelines?  I'll agree, parts of this
> > are a bit over-the-top, and there are a few cheap shots taken, but
> > the point of the post is still valid -- "here's how to ask a
> > question in a way that is likely to be answered in a civil and swift
> > manner"
> 
> One can just use, say Google.  Then one learns by trial and error plus
> common sense.  Common sense tells one that it makes people who helped
> you feel good about it if you say thanks to them.  

Naturally, "using Google" is an expected preliminary to asking for
a Human's time on a problem.

Unless you mean, "use Google to ascertain the collective behavior of
thousands of people on thousands of email help lists in order to
assimilate the behavior that is needed to get your questions answered".

Yes, that works, but it's slow. I think the world is much better off
for Raymond having written the above.  As for his style.  Well, sure,
it sounds arrogant, but the beauty of it is, that's a pretty accurate
capture of the attitude of a lot of the people you're asking to help
you -- so that in itself is enlightening, isn't it?

> A programmer will
> soon find out the difficulties of examining source code to find out
> what a program does (or to find a bug).  The author suggested that
> programmers should look at source code but I think that this should be
> done only as a last resort (unless one wants to maintain their skills
> in reading source code, including understanding the hardware).

That depends very much on the quality of the source code.  Well-documented,
well-designed Python code is a pleasure to read.  Thrown together perl
scripts hacked together without thought or serious consideration for the
reader, however, can be an absolute nightmare.  C/C++ code is usually
just too low-level to allow you to get any answers without some kind
of help.

In any case, anyone with any programming experience at all, should at
least *look* at the source distribution if they have an in-depth design
question.  Sometimes it's fruitless, but every once in awhile, you get
a nice surprise and your questions are answered -- sometimes in
considerable detail.

If not, well, that's when you go asking.

> One soon discovers that
> searching on a generalized error message (minus numbers unique to your
> situation, like tty2) works well.

This is a remarkably effective technique. I think people don't
do it, because it seems impossible that it should work.  It would
surely fail on an internal corporate help desk's "knowledge-base".
But with Google, with thousands of email help lists archived, it
works very well indeed.  There's a good chance I think, that if
this doesn't work, that no one has ever run into the problem
you are encountering.  Not exactly, anyway.

Cheers,
Terry


--
Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com )
Anansi Spaceworks  http://www.anansispaceworks.com