Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Charles Rot » Sun, 02 Mar 1997 04:00:00



Crossposting this to comp.os.linux.advocacy, as well as changing the
title.    The content is .. uhh .. "religious" in nature.  :^)

In article <01bc2373$6bdd2ec0$d69f389d@v-jurgex-main> "Jurgen Exner"

<v-jur...@microsoft.com> writes:
>Charles Roten <cro...@big.aa.net> wrote in article
><CROTEN.97Feb25033...@big.aa.net>...
>> In article <330BA3D8.5...@tafensw.edu.au> Peter Taylor
>> <peter.tay...@tafensw.edu.au> writes:

>> >Hi -  I've just installed linux (for the first time).

>> >I am using the bash shell. I have a problem with running a
>> >shell script. If I use the syntax 'bash scriptname' the script
>> >is executed. If I simply enter the script name nothing happens.
>> >This occurs even if I am logged on as root so I don't think it
>> >has anything to do with privileges. I am told this should not be
>> >the case. Can anyone suggest a solution?

>> >Thanks in advance,

>> >Peter
>> >peter.tay...@tafensw.edu.au

>> Dammit, people ought to be getting better answers here.

[My chastisement of what I considered answers in insufficient depth
 deleted]

>> [a lot more of good comments deleted]
>Well, I thought some time if I should post a follow-up.
>And although your argumentation is resonable, I have to admit, that
>I don't share your conclusion.
>Maybe you missed the name of this newsgroup: c.o.LINUX.SETUP

Nope. I didn't.  But I am far from blind as to what we're seeing
here.  Or why.  And, IMHO, it calls for measures that most of us,
myself included, would _never_ _consider_ under other circumstances.  

I'm _very_ serious about this.  See below.  

>Maybe I'm stupid, but for me this title implies that questions asked
>in this newsgroup should be related to the installation of linux and
>linux specific software.  

No, I _agree_ with your interpretation of this newsgroup's charter.  
But I _do_ think we have different interpretations of what the
fellow who asked the original question _represents_.  To me, he
represents the _second_ real chance UNIX has had to ascend to
something like it's proper place among PC operating systems.  Among
_other_ things.  Most of which are _far_ better than we deserve.  ;^>  

- Show quoted text -

>The question asked above had nothing to do with either of them! It's
>a question about a particular UNIX shell and not related to Linux or
>its installation at all.
>The fact, that a lot of people are making their first UNIX
>experiences right now with Linux does not excempt them from
>- using their intelligence
>- asking questions in the appropriate newsgroups only (in this case
>comp.unix.shell or maybe comp.unix.questions)
>- reading documentation (man bash would have answered at least two
>of the three points you pointed out in your posting)
>- reading books (there are excellent books on UNIX; yes, I expect
>people to read!)
>- reading old postings (this question has been asked in several
>forms for several times, dejanews is a good starting point)
>So far, the original poster got a quite decent explanation, although
>it was sprinkled in more than one answer.
>In my opinion this is more than he could expect.
>Please remember: This newsgroup is not intended to teach beginners

                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>how to use UNIX.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>jue

True enough.  

_BUT_.  

We are going to see, and indeed, ARE seeing, some of the rawest
newbies to come down the pike since AOL posts started showing up on
Usenet.  In _THIS_ newsgroup .. comp.os.linux.setup.  

IMHO, we should have expected _precisely_ this .. and _should_
_consider_ _it_ _a_ "_best_-_case_" _scenario_ .. or, at least, the
first stages of such.  

Look, some poor sod who has never so much as _logged_ _on_ to a UNIX
box in his entire _life_ may be getting his first taste of shell-
related issues while running Linux.  Like I think the original poster
did, in fact.  As far as _he_ is concerned, it is not a UNIX issue,
but a Linux issue ...  Ignorance up the wazoo, sure.  But for maybe
90% or more of the computing community, the difference between Linux-
specific issues and UNIX issues is invisible to the naked eye.  Since
they don't know anything about _either_, until they fire up their
shiny new Linux partition for the first time, and run smack into
them.

Then .. you guessed it .. they come _here_.  

Reading the right books will help, sure .. but I'll bet a dollar to a
donut that more than 80% of the folks who show up here have never
even _heard_ of the Nutshell series.  Even the _best_ references
aren't going to do a curst bit of good to someone who does not know
they _exist_.  

Again, I agree with your point that consulting the proper newsgroups
is the correct way to proceed .. but remember that, as I mentioned
before, the fellow who is _doing_ the consulting is _very_
_frequently_ unaware of the off-topic nature of the post when he or
she shows up _here_.  Re: my previous remark about the difference
between "Linux" and "UNIX" being invisible at the level that a good
many of the pinky-new Linux users are at right now.  

Look, I rather painfully recall the _last_ time UNIX was poised to
become a serious contender among PC operating systems.  The late '80s
...  SCO had their el-weirdo UNIX clone, which would run on machines
we would consider _painfully_ absurd today .. wretched '286 boxes,
with 4 mbytes of memory .. in some cases, less.  Then the '386s hit
the street.  Now by modern standards, the '386 is a boat anchor.  But
a 25 MHz '386, equipped with a cache, was about 5 times faster, for
most things, than a VAX 11-780.  I _know_.  I used both, and under
UNIX in both cases.  Sun came out with their 386i line .. doomed by
the poor engineering decisions (especially the _compiler_) made by
Sun ECD, and by Sun's decision to dump all but the SPARC hardware
architecture .. but in 1988, the effect of this market entry was
_quite_ dramatic.  Then Everex purchased a source license for AT&T
System V.  Other players got into the action ...  Computer Shopper
had a monthly _UNIX_ _column_, for Pete's sake.  "BYTE" spent some
effort to track the "workstation" class machines .. as it was
pikestaff-plain to those of us who _had_ used UNIX on Intel platforms
that there was no unbridgable gap _at_ _all_ between "PC" hardware
and "workstations".  

What happened ??  

Well, I happen to have a hardcopy of a couple of periodic posts of a
certain e...@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond), dating from June and
July of '93, to comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit.  One of them was an
overview of Unices available for PC-clone hardware.  And it tells a
pretty shocking story, taken in context.  SCO wanted a fellow's right
arm, one eye, and both gonads for a copy of _it's_ version of
SysVr3.2.  Most of the other vendors were _somewhat_ more reasonable
.. but $500 US was the _low_ bid.  Now _that_ was, then as now, 1/4
of the dollar amount of the cost of a mid-range PC.  Just for the
_operating_ _system_!  Once the _other_ tools were figured in, the
software ticket was _far_ higher than the cost of the _hardware_, for
the small-business market that, if you'll recall, made the PC
revolution happen in the _first_ _place_, back in the late '70s to
early '80s.  In short, the UNIX vendors priced themselves right out
of the market, for almost everyone.  

Then, too, there was the UNIX "reputation" as a poorly documented
and downright user-homicidal OS.  You've got to admit, by modern
standards, "nroff -man manual-page.1 | more" is a trifle primitive ..
but in 1990, that was as good as online UNIX documentation got.  In
early 1990, the _only_ book I could find on the X11 window system
that could in _any_ _sense_ be called a "User's Guide" was volume 3
of the O'Reilly series ... and at 700+ pages, the thing _was_ just a
_trifle_ intimidating to the average raw beginner.  

Put this all together, and the UNIX entries in the market were just
priced too far above most folk's heads, both in monetary terms and
in terms of training and/or "learning curve".  And Microsoft was
selling _simplicity_.  At a seemingly _far_ lower price point.  

So UNIX went down the tubes .. and these days nearly all one can see
is broken Microsoft trash, like Windows '95.  Running on platforms so
_incredibly_ powerful that just about anyone who did any serious
computing would have committed _cheerful_ _murder_ for one, just 10
years ago.  And just about the only operating systems that most folks
have had any experience with are that "broken Microsoft trash".  

Is it just me, or does this seem _particularly_ absurd to you too ?

Now, we have a second chance.  Linux _performs_ the feat of turning
a sow's ear into a silk purse.  And at a dollar cost _far_ _lower_
than what _inferior_ operating systems cost from Microsoft.  The
Linux Documentation Project has labored _heroically_ to make
UNIX/Linux issues accessible to folks who "grew up" using GatesWare.  
For folks who've been clued in, and have a few bucks to spend on
books, the folks at O'Reilly (and, these days, it's _competitors_)
have deployed a very impressive array of available hardcopy help.  

But in order for Linux to "make it" as _more_ than just a system for
hobbyists .. and, by doing so, to place a _well_ _designed_ operating
system on just about everyone's desk who wants one .. the Linux
community is going to have to go through the pains associated with a
veritable _mass_ _migration_ of _extremely_ raw newbies into it's
ranks.  

IMHO, in large part, the future of Linux in particular, and of UNIX
in general, will be _closely_ tied to the success or failure of the
Linux community in educating and thus absorbing the aforesaid
newbies.  

They are coming to _us_.  And, unlike the AOL folks who wandered into
Usenet a few years back, these UNIX-geeks-in-embryo are looking for
far more than merely another backyard fence to exchange gossip over.  
They are ...

read more »

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by DNRC ACIC and SACEO of obscure acronyms, FFTG of STUP » Tue, 04 Mar 1997 04:00:00


Quote:>>> Dammit, people ought to be getting better answers here.

I'm a newbie, I can't even get started. I've posted 4 messages, 5 now, to
comp.os.linux.setup and I've yet to recieve the first answer, except from other
newbies with similar problems. You want to overthrow Microsoft? train your
army. Perhaps my messages haven't been descriptive enough, but not understanding
the nature of my problem, how do I know what to tell someone?

Quote:> We are going to see, and indeed, ARE seeing, some of the rawest
> newbies to come down the pike since AOL posts started showing up on
> Usenet.  In _THIS_ newsgroup .. comp.os.linux.setup.  

Like me. I'm no idiot, but failing to even get a working installation boot disk
makes it difficult for me to make forward progress.

Quote:> IMHO, we should have expected _precisely_ this .. and _should_
> _consider_ _it_ _a_ "_best_-_case_" _scenario_ .. or, at least, the
> first stages of such.  

I agree whole-heartedly. train your army.

Quote:> Reading the right books will help, sure .. but I'll bet a dollar to a
> donut that more than 80% of the folks who show up here have never
> even _heard_ of the Nutshell series.  Even the _best_ references
> aren't going to do a curst bit of good to someone who does not know
> they _exist_.  

I've seen several books in stores, but the point of Linux is that it's free. I
don't want to shell out 50 bucks for a book and a distribution CD for a FREE
OS. It seems very contradictory. The stuff is available on FTP many places, why
pay for it. And I looked through the books, they didn't answer my question
either.

Quote:> But in order for Linux to "make it" as _more_ than just a system for
> hobbyists .. and, by doing so, to place a _well_ _designed_ operating
> system on just about everyone's desk who wants one .. the Linux
> community is going to have to go through the pains associated with a
> veritable _mass_ _migration_ of _extremely_ raw newbies into it's
> ranks.  
> Suffice to say, there seems to me to be _excellent_ reason to provide
> these folks with good and sufficient answers even if they _have_
> blundered into the wrong newsgroup, and/or have displayed woeful
> ignorance about the available documentation for UNIX, and how to
> exploit it.  

Yeah! So, uh....could I get some help?

Eric King


 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Alex Butch » Wed, 05 Mar 1997 04:00:00



Quote:>But in order for Linux to "make it" as _more_ than just a system for
>hobbyists .. and, by doing so, to place a _well_ _designed_ operating
>system on just about everyone's desk who wants one .. the Linux
>community is going to have to go through the pains associated with a
>veritable _mass_ _migration_ of _extremely_ raw newbies into it's
>ranks.  

Perhaps the thing to do is have a comp.os.linux.newuser group or
something (perhaps comp.unix.newuser would be more appropriate?) RFD,
anyone?

Regards,
Alex.
--
I'm looking for employment in Bristol, Bath, Reading or Cambridge, UK.
Please see <http://www.cse.bris.ac.uk/~ccajb/cv.html> for more details
-=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=-
Alex Butcher - Micro Support Technician  Tel +44 (0)117 928 9000 x3038
Computing Service, University of Bristol, Tyndall Ave. Bristol BS8 1UD

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by DOT » Wed, 05 Mar 1997 04:00:00


Snipped....

:>
:>We are going to see, and indeed, ARE seeing, some of the rawest
:>newbies to come down the pike since AOL posts started showing up on
:>Usenet.  In _THIS_ newsgroup .. comp.os.linux.setup.  
:>
:>IMHO, we should have expected _precisely_ this .. and _should_
:>_consider_ _it_ _a_ "_best_-_case_" _scenario_ .. or, at least, the
:>first stages of such.  
:>
:>Look, some poor sod who has never so much as _logged_ _on_ to a UNIX
:>box in his entire _life_ may be getting his first taste of shell-

Snipped...

:>Is it just me, or does this seem _particularly_ absurd to you too ?
:>
:>Now, we have a second chance.  Linux _performs_ the feat of turning
:>a sow's ear into a silk purse.  And at a dollar cost _far_ _lower_
:>than what _inferior_ operating systems cost from Microsoft.  The
:>Linux Documentation Project has labored _heroically_ to make
:>UNIX/Linux issues accessible to folks who "grew up" using GatesWare.  
:>For folks who've been clued in, and have a few bucks to spend on
:>books, the folks at O'Reilly (and, these days, it's _competitors_)
:>have deployed a very impressive array of available hardcopy help.  
:>
:>But in order for Linux to "make it" as _more_ than just a system for
:>hobbyists .. and, by doing so, to place a _well_ _designed_ operating
:>system on just about everyone's desk who wants one .. the Linux
:>community is going to have to go through the pains associated with a
:>veritable _mass_ _migration_ of _extremely_ raw newbies into it's
:>ranks.  
:>
:>IMHO, in large part, the future of Linux in particular, and of UNIX
:>in general, will be _closely_ tied to the success or failure of the
:>Linux community in educating and thus absorbing the aforesaid
:>newbies.  

Snipped again...

I wish I could have said this as well as you have. Since discovering Linux
several years ago and finally taking up the challenge only recently, I have
seen what a real benefit this OS could be to people without the resources to
obtain the much more powerful systems like the faster pentiums or deal with
the neverending upgrade path that Microsoft encourages. In this Linux excels.
It can be used on what are nearly doorstops now, the low end 486s, like mine.
And, with some help, can give people the kind of power that NT can only boast
of. (This I've been told by a co-worker who still uses NT.)

If the atmosphere of helpfulness I see in OS/2's newsgroups could be
encouraged more in Linux's (It's there but still not as prevelent yet.) then
Linux could well move out of it's present niche status and challenge even
Microsoft. The newbie of today may be the teacher-advocate of tomorrow.

Well, thankyou again for your post. It's quite encouraging!

 --
  Floyd L.Tolar

 (To reply, replace"DOT" with".")  
   "The riskier the road, the greater the profit."
  [Ferengi 62nd. Rule of Aquisition]                                          

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by afade » Wed, 05 Mar 1997 04:00:00


->

->
-> >But in order for Linux to "make it" as _more_ than just a system for
-> >hobbyists .. and, by doing so, to place a _well_ _designed_
operating
-> >system on just about everyone's desk who wants one .. the Linux
-> >community is going to have to go through the pains associated with a
-> >veritable _mass_ _migration_ of _extremely_ raw newbies into it's
-> >ranks.
->
-> Perhaps the thing to do is have a comp.os.linux.newuser group or
-> something (perhaps comp.unix.newuser would be more appropriate?) RFD,
-> anyone?
->
-> Regards,
-> Alex.
-> --

Flaming newbie's because it seems they didn't read the faq's or the
documentation which is in some odd ball directory which they may not
even have doesn't help anyone.  Often people have read the Faq's or
Howto's and are still lost.  (When I setup Masquerade on my system the
NET*HOWTOs were outdated and contained typos.  The email I got back from
the author suggested that the revised howto hadn't been done yet.)  Even
under the corrections in the HOWTO ([Ethernet||Net]*HOWTO) It seemed
that the kernel did not infact support masquerade (at least starting
from RedHat distribution.)  After installing BETA libraries, and 2.0.10
masquerade STARTED to work.
 Often people ask questions which are indirectly communicating a
weakness in the system which they have neither the language to
understand nor the background to express.  So when you see someone ask a
question think about how WE can make the answer not only clear -- but
more answerable in the future without the resort of posting to some
newsgroup.
 Consider, to post on newsgroup you have to have connection to the net.
How many "newbies" try - fail - have no resource to ask - and stop.  The
other part of this is this newsgroup is called comp.os.linux.setup which
contains all keywords suggesting questions about setup should be
directed here.  If one feels that a question is from a "newbie" and
takes the stand of the elitist - why not retort try reading:

 http://.../.../*.howto.html

As for comp.unix.newuser
that is too generic - be linux specific - so
 comp.os.linux.newuser ?

So then you have to update all the references to this newgroup after you
start that one.  Which I'd hazzard to guess will mean contacting dozens
of people.

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Mark Sutto » Wed, 05 Mar 1997 04:00:00



Quote:> Perhaps the thing to do is have a comp.os.linux.newuser group or
> something (perhaps comp.unix.newuser would be more appropriate?) RFD,
> anyone?

One problem I see with this is that there would probably be nothing
but newbes reading such a group!

I have no problem with newbes posting well-considered concise questions
in c.o.l.setup or c.o.l.misc.

When I see that a newbe appears to have read many of the relevant HOWTO's
and has gotten his machine set up 90% the way he wants it but just needs
a clue where one particular set of documentation can be found,
I am more than happy to help.

As long as the newbe shows that he has made an effort, I'm always happy to
help him.

I even have no qualms at all about answering "I would like to try Linux,
where can I find the documentation?"

The posts that yank my chain are ones that clearly are from someone who
has not even attempted an install yet and has a laundry list of about
50 *very basic* questions that are covered in the first few pages of the
installation HOWTO.  Another kind of post that is irritating are the ones
that give you absolutely nothing to go on to provide help, such as:
"I made my boot an root disks and my computer doesn't boot from the
boot floppy, what do I do?".  No information on their hardware, no information
on the boot image they are using, no info on what error messages were produced
etc.

I'm not sure a c.o.l.newuser group would get these type of questions out
of the other groups.  If a particular new user won't read any HOWTOs,
how can we expect him to read newsgroup charters!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

|  The Laitram Corporation     | http://www.gnofn.org/~marksu/         |
|  New Orleans, Louisiana      |                                       |
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Scot » Wed, 05 Mar 1997 04:00:00



> I have no problem with newbes posting well-considered concise questions
> in c.o.l.setup or c.o.l.misc.

> When I see that a newbe appears to have read many of the relevant HOWTO's
> and has gotten his machine set up 90% the way he wants it but just needs
> a clue where one particular set of documentation can be found,
> I am more than happy to help.

> As long as the newbe shows that he has made an effort, I'm always happy to
> help him.

> I even have no qualms at all about answering "I would like to try Linux,
> where can I find the documentation?"

> The posts that yank my chain are ones that clearly are from someone who
> has not even attempted an install yet and has a laundry list of about
> 50 *very basic* questions that are covered in the first few pages of the
> installation HOWTO.  Another kind of post that is irritating are the ones
> that give you absolutely nothing to go on to provide help, such as:
> "I made my boot an root disks and my computer doesn't boot from the
> boot floppy, what do I do?".  No information on their hardware, no information
> on the boot image they are using, no info on what error messages were produced
> etc.

> I'm not sure a c.o.l.newuser group would get these type of questions out
> of the other groups.  If a particular new user won't read any HOWTOs,
> how can we expect him to read newsgroup charters!

Just to get in some perspective from the newbie point of view.  

I've gotten nothing but helpful and polite responses from questions I've
posted to the Linux newsgroups.  

The problem I've had with Linux is that it not intuitive (much like this
dos's of old) and one can understand something and not understand something
related.  These related things are the newbie nightmares, but are perfectly
logical to the oldies.  

An example would be the over 100 questions that emanate from the make config
process.  Most of which mean nothing to a newbie.  Welsh's book list's
a description of 20 of them... but how about the other 80????  No place have
I found a list of all of them and description of what they mean.  When I first
rebuilt my kernel, lots of things started to go wrong that I'm sure were related
to how I answered those questions.

The most disturbing tendency I've seen on the Linux newgroups is a small
minority of individuals that take great pride in chastising, ridiculing or
responding with sarcasm to newbie questions.  Out of all the groups I read,
Linux groups are the worst in this regard.  Every newsgroup has about 20
questions that are asked 1,000 times a year by newbies. Whether it be
rec.motorcycles (can shaft drives wheelie) or comp.lang.c++ ( visual c++ or borland
c++), no one forces you to read or answer these.  If you can't do it politely,
please don't.  You don't own this newsgroup anymore than the newest of the
newbies, and you don't look smarter by making others feel dumber.  A referral
to a HOWTO isn't wrong, if you are sure the answer is there, otherwise a
referral and a couple ideas (e.g. did you remember to run lilo after editing)
are fantastic!!  Of course you can just not respond and offend no one.

For the 95%, thanks for the help, and let's all remember, you were all once like
me.  Well...  maybe not that bad.
Scott

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Bernd Mey » Thu, 06 Mar 1997 04:00:00



>Just to get in some perspective from the newbie point of view.  
>I've gotten nothing but helpful and polite responses from questions I've
>posted to the Linux newsgroups.  
>An example would be the over 100 questions that emanate from the make config
>process.  Most of which mean nothing to a newbie.

The choice of typing "h" should probably be mentioned somewhere. As far
as I know, almost all of the questions now have an explanation associated
with them that you can view simply by typing "h".

Quote:>For the 95%, thanks for the help, and let's all remember, you were
>all once like me.  Well...  maybe not that bad.  

You think you have it hard? Back when I was a young linux lad, we didn't
even have kernel configuration. We had to walk ten miles, through the snow...
oops, sorry, wrong tape... We had to edit the Makefile, with vi, which we
had to download first. And then we had to write the kernel to a floppy,
and hexedit the floppy to tell it the root filesystem.....

Geez, sometimes I miss those times...

Bernie

--
============================================================================
"It's a magical world, Hobbes ol' buddy...
                                           ...let's go exploring"
Calvin's final words, on December 31st, 1995

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Massimo Campostrin » Thu, 06 Mar 1997 04:00:00



> You think you have it hard? Back when I was a young linux lad, we didn't
> even have kernel configuration. We had to walk ten miles, through the snow...
> oops, sorry, wrong tape... We had to edit the Makefile, with vi, which we
> had to download first. And then we had to write the kernel to a floppy,
> and hexedit the floppy to tell it the root filesystem.....

> Geez, sometimes I miss those times...

And then some bright young hacker from a remote country will post:
"Do you pine for the nice days of Linux-0.12, when men were men and
wrote their own device drivers?  Are you without a project...  
Then this post might be just for you."

[Sorry, I couldn't resist.]

--
        Massimo Campostrini,
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Pisa.
WWW home page: http://www.difi.unipi.it/~campo/

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Everett Hubba » Thu, 06 Mar 1997 04:00:00


From the newbie side.
:>Look, some poor sod who has never so much as _logged_ _on_ to a UNIX
:>box in his entire _life_ may be getting his first taste look.
:>
I have now had Slackware and Xwindows up and running for about a week.
I haven't gotten it to print yet.  That should qualify as newbie.
:>
:>Linux _performs_ the feat of turning :>a sow's ear into a silk purse.  And
:>at a dollar cost _far_ _lower_ than what _inferior_ operating systems cost from
:>Microsoft. help.  
:>
If I were happy with Windows, I would not be trying Linux.  I have
expended a lot of time and effort to have just gotten this far not to
mention a few bucks for books.
:>
:>But in order for Linux to "make it" as _more_ than just a system for
:>hobbyists .. and, by doing so, to place a _well_ _designed_ operating
:>system on just about everyone's desk who wants one .. the Linux
:>community is going to have to go through the pains associated with a
:>veritable _mass_ _migration_ of _extremely_ raw newbies into it's
:>ranks.  
:>
When I started with computers (Atari 400 with 8 K of memory) in 1981,
I took classes in  B.A.S.I.C and C at the local Junior College.  We
formed an local club, started a BBS and supported each other.  There
are no classes in this area for Linux.  There isn't enough awareness
of Linux  in this area to start a local club.   There is no local
support as yet for someone starting Linux.  Is there support on
the news groups?  I guess that is up to you.

:>IMHO, in large part, the future of Linux in particular, and of UNIX
:>in general, will be _closely_ tied to the success or failure of the
:>Linux community in educating and thus absorbing the aforesaid
:>newbies.  

You have the opportunity to get a ground floor of newbies started.  If
you take the time to hold our hands and get us started, we may form
clubs and support groups in our local areas.  This will encourage more
users to look at Linux and raise the awareness of its existence.  Who
knows, Linux usage might grow.  The decision as to whether the base of
Linux users will grow or continue at its present pace is up to you.

Check back with me in six months or so.  That should be enough time
for me to give Linux a good try and decide if I feel it is worth my
time and effort, or at least get it to print.

Everett Hubbard

http://www.hometel.com/~ehubbard/

The Gods give us what we wish for, as punishment.
 .

 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by l.. » Thu, 06 Mar 1997 04:00:00




>Perhaps the thing to do is have a comp.os.linux.newuser group or
>something (perhaps comp.unix.newuser would be more appropriate?) RFD,
>anyone?

>Regards,
>Alex.
>--
>I'm looking for employment in Bristol, Bath, Reading or Cambridge, UK.
>Please see <http://www.cse.bris.ac.uk/~ccajb/cv.html> for more details
>-=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=-
>Alex Butcher - Micro Support Technician  Tel +44 (0)117 928 9000 x3038
>Computing Service, University of Bristol, Tyndall Ave. Bristol BS8 1UD

Personally, I think this is very good idea. Now I know that some of the
follow-ups to this subject say that such a group would only be read by
newbies but I don't think that is true. The linux community seems to be
very supportive and forgiving and I believe some people would take it
upon themselves to occassionally scan subject lines and answer a few
questions. Also, I believe that "newbies" can help other newbies.

It was the enthusiasm and cooperative nature evident in the the development
of linux that finally won me over. I hope to be able to make my own
contributions to linux in the future. Helping new users would ensure the
continued interest in linux development.

From my own experience, the comp.os.linux* hierarchy can be a bit
intimidating to a new user. I have been using linux for just two days
now. Well, not using exactly, I'm still struggling with alot of things.
Prior to this I have spent the last six weeks reading comp.os.linux*
on a daily basis, plus checking out all the resources on the www. The
great abundance of online material is a boon for the more seasoned linux
user but overwhelming for the new user.

Actually I'm surprised that a comp.os.linux.newuser group doesn't already
exist.


 
 
 

Why we should cut newbies unusual slack here (was: Re: Syntax for running a shell script)

Post by Omegam » Fri, 07 Mar 1997 04:00:00



Quote:>If the atmosphere of helpfulness I see in OS/2's newsgroups could be
>encouraged more in Linux's (It's there but still not as prevelent yet.) then
>Linux could well move out of it's present niche status and challenge even
>Microsoft. The newbie of today may be the teacher-advocate of tomorrow.

My opinion is to help out one user at a time.  I recently encountered a
friend who was struggling with a linux install that someone else did for
him.  By doing so, he had little understanding of the system.  After
trolling around on his box a little bit, I quickly realized it was a mess.

He wasn't married to it.  I recommended he install from the ground up, which
he did.  This has been the best way I've seen to help new users and promote
linux.  I'm thinking of coordinating a small local users group in my neck of
the woods.

It's also fun to show a well-functioning setup to an unitiated Windows user.
It runs like an Ox for days.  They're shocked, especially if they have the
usual preconceived notions about unix.  And then you tell em you're doing
all this on a 3 year old 486-33 ;)

I honestly could setup a user-friendly linux box for another person.  But I
don't think I would (unless the money was right ;) )  

I don't think it's necessarily useful to send someone who has no
understanding of computing to linux.  There are friends of mine who own
computers who I don't recommend it to.  Oh, I tell them how much I like it,
how much better it runs than my Windows 95 box at work, etc.  But they know
I'm a "techie"

If you can, find a linux friend and share your experiences.  AS far as
answering the most b*of questions, i just ignore them.  It's far more
important that people find some answers (and genuine understanding)
themselves.

me

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------

   PGP Key fingerprint =        | How are you gonna come?
   6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2      | With your hands upon your head,  
   59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63      | Or on the trigger of your gun?"
Send email with "get key" as the| -- The Clash, "Guns of Brixton"
"Subject:" to get my public key |   _London_Calling_ , 1979
---------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

1. Syntax for running a shell script

Hi -  I've just installed linux (for the first time).

I am using the bash shell. I have a problem with running a shell script.
If I use the syntax 'bash scriptname' the script is executed. If I
simply enter the script name nothing happens. This occurs even if I am
logged on as root so I don't think it has anything to do with
privileges. I am told this should not be the case. Can anyone suggest a
solution?

Thanks in advance,

Peter

2. Is Linux for the retarded?

3. ? Unix Shell Syntax to log out user from a shell script ?

4. RPM 4 crashes up2date & gnorpm

5. Why DO I hae to us e sh to run a Shell script

6. Simple newbie question

7. Why 'alias' cannot run by shell script?

8. fetchmail not always fetching

9. Unusual Realaudio error on Slack 4.0

10. Shell script/filter Slack '96 error

11. How to find other copies of same shell script running inside shell?

12. Pointers/Help with a basic shell script (Shell Newbie alert)

13. Need shell script to cut a file into subroutines