this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2025
886 points (96.8% liked)
linuxmemes
22801 readers
393 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
3. Post Linux-related content
sudo
in Windows.4. No recent reposts
5. π¬π§ Language/ΡΠ·ΡΠΊ/Sprache
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Man pages are for people who already know a lot about Linux and understand all the nuances and understanding of Linux
Even after using Linux for many many years I still don't understand wtf nearly all man pages mean. It's like a fucking codex. It needs to be simplified but not to the extreme where it doesn't give you information you need to understand it.
Tbh that's most of Linux, not designed for average people, designed by Linux users who think that all others should know everything about Linux.
Enter tldr and navi
Iβd like to add
apropos
to this as well.my favorite is tealdeer!
They also usually assume a lot about the users' knowledge of the domain of the program itself.
In my experience, many programs' man/help is very brief, often a sentence or less per command/flag, with 2 or more terms that don't mean anything to the uninitiated. Also, even when I think I know all the words, the descriptions are not nearly precise enough to confidently infer what exactly the program is going to do.
Disclaimers for potentially dangerous/irreversible actions are also often lacking.
Which is why I almost always look for an article that explains a command using examples, instead of trying to divine what the manual authors had in mind.
Tbh a lot of man pages don't even give you enough usage information to make full use of a package. I'm thinking of the ones which are like an extended
--help
blockl must be using man pages very differently from you. To me they are mostly the easy reference to check the available flags for a command, and sometimes the reference on available config file entries, e.g. ssh_config(5)
For those things I was using them quite soon when I started using Linux, because it's quicker than googleing every time if you just need one flag or one option name. For more complex things, like tar-and-gzip in one which needs like four, I still google though.
Probably there are very complicated ones too, the ones explaining subsystems or APIs of the kernel, but those I don't need as a user.
I don't get it either. I can see how you're getting confused if you end up in section 2 or 3 of the manpages or with the kernel calls. But that's not what a beginner is looking for. The manpages for the user commands are pretty alright. Sometimes even excellent.
It depends on who writes them, I guess. More "modern" software come with pretty good and concise manpages, meanwhile stuff like the coreutils still have manpages that feel like an incomprehensible mess.
I find them very useful for programs that I already know what to use them for otherwise I usually consult the arch wiki.