Why newbies don't RTFM... 4744

Thank you for that reference: I'll have to take a closer look at that tool.

Yes. I thought it was a stunningly good idea, when Eric described it to me, several years ago. He was about to pitch it for possible funding to a firm whose name might be something like Scarlet Chapeau, and I gather that the proposal must have been declined, at that time. (I'm not being critical, mind: It was at a time of severely tightened belts, and companies were having to watch priorities merely to survive more or less intact, let alone make advances.)

I hope the idea of unifying documentation doesn't get dropped entirely. Eric even was making progress towards programmatically identifying and filling in the holes (e.g., entirely missing manpages) in existing docs, though I can no longer remember details. (This was about the time the CML2 contretemps played out, which was very dismaying to him.)

They are. It is the preferred and recommended upstream master format for new LDP documentation, though there is a minority that persists in advocating the simpler Linuxdoc SGML format. As someone who maintains LDP documents in each, I can see the points both sides make, but agree with the majority on balance.

The LDP Author's Guide is useful in setting up a toolchain and such. I personally did the minimum in that area, copied the style and markup of

-- Cheers, Rick Moen Support your local medical examiner: Die strangely.