[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am not sure it is that is not warranted, rather that the code comes from
> such disparate places that it would be logistically very difficult to
> collate and maintain. At least with a single vendor changes are managed,
> and so documentation updates are controllable.
One aspect that I haven't seen mentioned is that Linux is a
variant of UNIX, and UNIX has historically never had the sort
of "Messages and Codes Manual" that people in the IBM mainframe
world are so acustomed to.
It's not as if Linux is breaking with an age old tradition
and being the first ever operating system in the world not
to have a "Messages and Codes Manual".
And it's certainly not the case that an active and conscious
decision *not* to provide such a manual was made, based on the
silly claim that it is not necessary because with Linux you
have the source.
The argument that Linux code comes from many disparate places
also seems irrelevant, given that the original UNIX code all
came from one place: Bell Labs, yet it did not have a Messages
and Codes Manual.
Now, the argument that *adding* a Messages and Codes Manual
right now is going to be difficult because there are so many
disparate organisations involved, and the argument that it is
not quite as necessary as it was for the old IBM mainframe
operating systems because Unix/Linux message are intended to
be descriptive (not that they always are...), whereas the IBM
messages originally really *were* just the codes, those
arguments are probably valid.
That would explain why it is not very likely that an IBM
style "Messages and Codes Manual" will be implemented for
Linux any time soon, but they have no bearing on why it
isn't there to begin with.
There have been many operating systems that do not have a
direct equivalent of the "Messages and Codes Manual" (and
many other useful features) that IBM provides with its
mainframe operating systems.
Similarly, I bet one can find many useful things that other
systems have, that z/OS, z/VM and/or VSE are lacking.
Lack of a Messages and Codes Manual should not be taken as
proof positive that Linux is an inferior operating system.
It just shows that Linux comes from a different background,
a different culture. Not inferior, just different.
--
Willem Konynenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas
that could provoke such a question -- Charles Babbage
