X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:references:message-id:date:from:reply-to :subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s= default; b=pIimhiMz1v94KS0387PRifE+HTgMnJ4lGuldW30eEFXQrh/ueO5cs nHmLIgrhbR4nK343i9zU6X6/mZmzfd7czqqJqmSsgV1NwlBiBeClNjqInbOGoHSA H2TZ/9uRnD8E9jrWpwP0ObLT2eiLKr6B0MjFfSuQAsnLyXs4zPWgfc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:references:message-id:date:from:reply-to :subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type; s=default; bh=KTeExb9o1PxQcqGXLjIfdzVxYRs=; b=piGG4wgcCOTqThOkVEBjfINwO7fS p8qbjx1cDXJFmpyA90FkacMf1stjK5E5nShCODJlvbCf39LXRZaaY7o8Av4GdWP1 hupG37Z0+dKxocwc1jb1g2Qj1wbyDEfptyq9F6bxuyxtFaEZGfBpWCzH15punS13 F5aDrKJelVNPiI8= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: nm49-vm6.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com References: <1388523397 DOT 38131 DOT YahooMailNeo AT web162702 DOT mail DOT bf1 DOT yahoo DOT com> <20131231212051 DOT GB4460 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> Message-ID: <1388528041.29965.YahooMailNeo@web162706.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 14:14:01 -0800 (PST) From: Jonathan Martin Reply-To: Jonathan Martin Subject: Re: Ok, then To: "cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" In-Reply-To: <20131231212051.GB4460@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes This is more philosophic than technical. I would like to put together a tutorial that groups unix command line tools according to complexity so that the easiest and most essential tools are presented first and the more complex tools are stated later, along with a short description that would clarify an individual's research beforehand, just like DOS used to do, in similar subsets.MAN and INFO do not do this, and often MAN and INFO have commands that a system might not even have with no reason in sight for why. The bash HELP does that too. Building docs and similar activities could prime a user for ferreting out issues, and it could be a basically harmless process, fairly easy to instruct on, and very constructive for the education of users. I like unix utilities, I have to stop myself from using ls at a DOS prompt because I do dir/w anyway(and the difference is irrelevant in powershell), but I've had the problem of trying to work through a glut of documentation to discover how not to have to work through a glut of documentation. A tutorial at least similar to what I have described will ultimately lead to windows users not sounding as dumb as I probably have. Otherwise it doesn't have much of a use. Cygwin is better developed than almost every set of unix tool replacement suites available, and far more trustworthy, so I don't see why this would be a bad idea. I am not specifically complaining, either, I am saying I would like to help fix something that doesn't likely look like a problem, but sort of is. Both Cygwin and Linux are losing potential users because of a simple hiccup in the learning process that I would like to help with. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple