FAQ vs. Immediate Answer?
Bill's LFS Login
lfsbill at wlmcs.com
Wed Jan 15 04:58:53 PST 2003
In this recent exchange, an admonishment to *not* directly post answers
that are contained in the FAQ is posted. I believe this "policy" is open
for discussion, based on previous activity on this list.
>From sk at sethwklein.net Wed Jan 15 07:31:25 2003
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:20:43 -0500
To: lfs-dev at linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: xfree86 4.2.1 driver set ?
Bruce Dubbs <bdubbs at swbell.net> wrote:
> kris at intra-team.de wrote:
> >i build up a automatical setupscript for x but faild choosing a
> >card driver.
> >The xfree page says:
> > [....]
> 1. Please post this to blfs-support.
> 2. When starting a new request, do NOT reply to another message
> and change the header. It attaches your message to the wrong
Please don't post answers that are in the FAQ. Please post references
to the FAQ instead. In this case the relevent entries are:
Note that the second item won't appear until the next automatic update.
Seth W. Klein
First, I applaud the effort to encourage greater use of the FAQ and have
no issues with using references to it in any reply to a question that
the FAQ addresses. For me it is along the lines of "see man ..." or see
$LFS/usr/src/*/<pkg docs> and is always an appropriate inclusion in any
Second, in past threads dealing with common courtesy, when certain
individuals posted *only* references to applicable documentation, they
have been chided by others that they should have also provided the
answer at that time. Not frequently, but it has happened. If there are
many who feel that, for whatever reason, an answer should also be
posted, maybe your "edict" (I use the term because I have seen no
"groundswell" saying this is what we should do, not as a derogatory
term) is inappropriate?
Last, for those who are interested in monitoring the list(s) and
providing help, I feel it is their choice (for reasons of time,
familiarity and convenience) whether to provide an answer, post a
reference or both, *until* there appears to be a "policy" set by G. or
the consensus of the editors or a more-or-less consesus by the list
Again, I support the increased use of references. But I do not wish to
see valuable contributors of support put off by unwarranted (IMO)
chastisement over an, AFAICT, impromptu policy establishment.
If I missed a major discussion/decision that established this, I
apologize for the waste of time and energy.
lfsbill at wlmcs.com
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev