Difference between revisions of "Talk:PC-BSD® Users Handbook/9.2"
(→Suggested addition: new section)
|Line 22:||Line 22:|
Revision as of 11:05, 4 March 2010
hi, any idea to break this page into smaller parts? like sub page?
I think that would be a good idea. Just haven't gotten to it yet. I did finish adding all the images today (4-17-09)
>> great, I will test later (2009-04-18)
>> *oops* I don't have any permission to create new page (2009-04-18)
please take a look @ http://wiki.pcbsd.org/index.php/PC-BSD_Users_Handbook#Supporting_PC-BSD
I've split it, if it's good enough, I will process the other page otherwise, I'll revert back
I have to say I don't care for the use of Wikis, especially for documentation. Can you tell who's writing what here for example? It's all well and good to have users adding to documentation but it needs to be controlled and run through the same kind of approval process as code. Not sure what sort of workflow/approval processes are available in Joomla, but in Drupal it's easy. I'd recommend ditching the wiki concept and implementing documentation as a normal revision process within the CMS. While I'm at it, I never understood the reason why mailing lists as a method of team communication still exist when forums are far superior. Most of the PCBSD community doesn't participate in the mailing lists, and that's where a lot of great information is. If they did participate, it would soon get completely out of hand and in-boxes would fill up with junk in short order.
As for this documentation wiki page, I didn't see anything get broken up. It's still a very long page that takes forever to load if you don't have bandwidth. You need to create separate URLs for each section. Blogs invariably suffer from this same problem, but this is not a blog. It's important to break into separate pages for other reasons as well: people need to make comments and ask questions (better done in a comment style, not a wiki) that are topic specific.
...Jeff (May 18, 2009)
Can you explain the Runports concept a little better? For example, if I install a port/package, do I have to run it using Runports(user) or not? What's the diff? If I have to, or it's advisable to, run a program using Runports, then shouldn't the menu command reflect that? Maybe I'm not understanding the concept, but it seems to me it would have been preferable to make it so changing the PCBSD ports tree required Runports, rather than having to invoke it as a normal FreeBSD user.
I would suggest adding a humble moderation to this statement: Hardware such as video, sound, network and other devices are auto-detected and available at the first system startup.
add: If recognised and a driver is available which in many instances isn't. Without a driver your device will not work.