Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
Richard Erlacher
03/05/10 18:20
Read: 257 times
Denver, Co
USA


 
Msg Score: +2
 +2 Good Question
#173896 - Has any effort gone into documentation?
Responding to: Jan Waclawek's previous message
I've found, over the years, that open-source materials generally have lots of information about hot-rodding, installation, configuration, modification, etc. A simple, clear, concise user-manual is often among the missing.

I've yet to see a document that actually tells you how to use LINUX, for example, yet there are terabytes of info about how to make it do this or that, yet nothing to tell you the basics about how to make it do useful work.

Example ... (re: LINUX) ... I recently had a colleague set up a LINUX box for me. Purpose: Run the XILINX ISE software under LINUX. Result: There's no doc on how to adjust the display configuration so it can operate in native mode for the LCD monitor I use. Further, there's no way to determine how to get the OS configured back to the way what little doc exists says it should.

It's the same way with SDCC. There are volumes dealing with various installation/configuration options, yet not one that clearly tells you how to use SDCC in order to produce useable output, simulate it, and install it in your target environment without clobbering you with countless configuration options.

Yes, open-source stuff needs to be installed and, sometimes, further configured, particularly under LINUX, but why does that have to take up 999 pages of the 1000-page user guide? Why can't they be segregated? I only need to configure it once. I need a thorough and complete user guide every day.

RE


List of 39 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
SDCC download      Erik Malund      03/05/10 11:53      
   Here you go...      Robert Revens      03/05/10 12:13      
   newest      Jan Waclawek      03/05/10 12:30      
      Has any effort gone into documentation?        Richard Erlacher      03/05/10 18:20      
         documentation      Jan Waclawek      03/06/10 03:16      
            Just to add...      Robert Revens      03/06/10 04:02      
               more howto-s      Jan Waclawek      03/06/10 05:13      
                  the first 'oddity' is ...      Erik Malund      03/06/10 06:46      
                     I think you dreamt that one eric      Jez Smith      03/06/10 07:27      
                        No - it's a well-known Gotcha! in SDCC!      Andy Neil      03/06/10 11:46      
                           Reference: ISRs (or prototypes) must be in same file as main      Andy Neil      03/07/10 01:04      
                     linking      Jan Waclawek      03/06/10 14:36      
                        I see it not correct      Erik Malund      03/06/10 14:51      
                           I don't understand      Jan Waclawek      03/06/10 15:04      
                              what is it you do not understand?      Erik Malund      03/07/10 07:11      
                                 Does it not recognise...      Andy Neil      03/07/10 07:25      
                                 Surely not...      Robert Revens      03/07/10 08:42      
                                    "magic"      Jan Waclawek      03/07/10 10:44      
                                       That's not the fault of 'C'!!      Andy Neil      03/07/10 13:14      
                                       highly unusal, but      Erik Malund      03/07/10 18:42      
                                       Try java etc      Oliver Sedlacek      03/08/10 07:54      
                                 I now see why is this confusing      Jan Waclawek      03/07/10 10:27      
               emulation?      Andy Peters      03/11/10 15:53      
                  Source-level debug      Robert Revens      03/11/10 16:15      
                     symbol information      Maarten Brock      03/12/10 04:05      
                        re: symbol information      Andy Peters      03/15/10 18:40      
                           hex-file download?      Maarten Brock      03/16/10 05:46      
                              hex vs omf      Andy Peters      03/16/10 12:08      
                     Keil proprietary stuff?      Andy Neil      03/12/10 05:01      
                        extended omf51      Juergen Christoph      03/12/10 07:11      
                           omf51 vs cdb      Jan Waclawek      03/15/10 16:48      
                        proprietary file format?      James Hinnant      03/15/10 01:22      
                           I don't see why not      Andy Neil      03/15/10 01:33      
                              So, what do *you* mean by, "proprietary" ?      Andy Neil      03/16/10 02:15      
                                 AutoCAD      Per Westermark      03/16/10 03:15      
                           Yes      Per Westermark      03/15/10 01:37      
                              patentable vs proprietary      James Hinnant      03/15/10 23:39      
                                 Proprietary is a questin of ownership, not protection      Per Westermark      03/16/10 01:06      
   bouncing email      Maarten Brock      03/07/10 14:38      

Back to Subject List