From: rak@loft (Robert Kiesling)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: uucp/mail/news FAQ
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:25:01 GMT
	<1992Nov4.080547.1063@loft> <1992Nov4.215755.23652@nwnexus.WA.COM>
Organization: Internet Free Michigan


   rak@loft (Robert Kiesling) writes:

   >In article <1992Nov3.145652.16885@aw2.fsl.ca.boeing.com> vds7789@aw2.fsl.ca.boeing.com (Vincent D. Skahan) writes:
   >   once again, I see no reason to write (and have to support) a c.o.l.
   >   FAQ for things that are already either documented in FAQ's or in books
   >   you can buy.

   >   there are a variety of groups regarding uucp including comp.mail.uucp.
   >   'elm', 'mush', and 'smail' have their own newsgroups.

   [stuff deleted...

   that's why there's news.admin, news.software.readers, news.answers,
   comp.mail.uucp (and so on...) as well as the (fine) O'Reilly+Assoc series
   of books including 'managing uucp and usenet'., Evi Nemeth's "Unix System
   Administration Handbook",. etc. Why reinvent the wheel?

   you're not supposed to do this stuff if you're clueless.
   USENET is not for kiddies.

Absolutely.  The best reply is usally "rtfm!"  At least to the
postings I've seen here...  

   [ more stuff deleted ...

   you don't have to do ANYTHING to set it up differently from any other
   unix (a credit to the folks involved!).

   There are no Linux-specific-things to do, therefore there are no Linux-specific
   pointers required. I set up uucico to run from cron at home and I don't
   do *anything* manually except read the news/mail that comes in...

   comp.os.linux is (I thought) intended to further the o/s and associated
   stuff, not to be what the news.* hierarchy is already chartered to do.

   The other groups have their charters.  Questions regarding items inside their
   charters should go to them, not c.o.l.

   [ deleted ... 

   >In his uucp internals FAQ, Ian Taylor wrote, "(This FAQ) does not
   >describe how to configure UUCP, nor how to solve connection problems,
   >nor how to deal with UUCP mail.  There are currently no FAQ postings
   >on any of these topics, and I do not plan to write any."

   There is not a FAQ because it's documented already in vendor documents,
   the O'Reilly books, etc.  There is no *need*. Grab the mailpak .tar.Z
   file(s), extract them, and type 'make'.  Then grab the newspak stuff
   and do the same. 

   >   Just go out and buy O'Reilly+Assoc's "managing uucp and usenet"...
   >   And subscribe-to/read news.answers for the FAQs.

   >The nutshell manual is great, *once* Taylor uucp is configured to
   >correctly use BNU or V2 format config files.  It also tells how to
   >test the link in a way that's mostly non-disruptive, and has the
   >clearest description of rs-232 harware handshaking I've read.  But it
   >says nothing about configuring Taylor UUCP specifically.  Nor smail,
   >nor Vixie cron, nor any specific newsreader.

   But you already get HDB if you run Ed Carp's mailpak, which uses the
   HDB configuration.  You don't have to do anything...it's done for you.
   [...Ed, do I get a royalty every time I tell somebody you did good?...]

   Care and feeding of smail is a reasonably non-issue if you grab the
   smail3.1.28 I provide as part of 'newspak'.  I have about 4 lines of
   total configuration files to set system-specific stuff.  The incredible
   things you *could* do with smail are well-documented in the smail docs
   and in the comp.mail.smail newsgroup. I asked a question via email to
   Steve Robbins who provided excellent info that I included when I uploaded
   newspak (in the smail stuff).

   care and feeding of vixie cron is extremely well documented in the
   docs that come with it.  A no-brainer.

   each newsreader comes with excruciating detail in docs and once again
   the OR+A book(s) are the best sources of info. There is no need to
   write anything.

   sigh...
   there IS NO system-specific stuff to be done any more.
   Grab newspak.  Grab mailpak.  Grab vixcron.  type make.  Miller Time.

... Installing -- and using -- news software does not end with typing
"make."

I was not able to ftp mailpak on my own miniscule ftp funding.  I
grabbed it on disk from someone else in town (thanks again, Rob!).
Installing the binaries was, in fact, a no-brainer, all credit to Ed.
Newspak was not released when I installed c-news here, unfortunately.
It would have saved a lot of time.  Then there is the administrivia,
coordinating with uucp neighbors, etc., etc.

Installing SLS or MCC, for example, is also intended (I assume) to be
easy as possible.  I still see lots of postings from people who have
questions.

   A person getting started running news gets news/mail fed from
   somewhere.  If they have no clue, and they don't try to get a clue, they
   live with the implications of their lack of action.  

And so do other Linux activists.  The "Usenet is not for kiddies"
sentiment is usually stated in reference to MS-LOSS or Mac people.  It
would be great if Linux activists can avoid that.

							Everybody is a 
   beginner once.  Everybody screws up.  No biggie. If a rookie admin 
   doesn't get in touch with his uucp neighbor(s) to help prevent him from
   screwing up BIG deserves what he/she gets.

I did lean heavily on my uucp neighbors (thanks, Dave and Marc).  Both
are non-pc architecture machines.  Anyway, it's easy for a rookie admin to
edit their Systems file, type "postnews" and send stuff out into the
world with no idea where it's going -- a no-brainer.

   I strongly disagree about the need to document something in general
   in a comp.os.linux group. You must disagree, cool. Have fun.

No real disagreement, IMHO.  Just a matter of how to do this.  Would
you consider including one or two of these many docs in newspak?
Newspak is a necessary and important part of Linux -- thanks.  I admit
to not having looked at it (yet).  I've had too many other things to
do.  Soon, though.

Yours was the only negative response out of the dozen or so I have
received, mostly from beginners.  That's not enough to prompt me to go
to the trouble of writing and distributing a FAQ or a meta-FAQ.  Nor
does it seem from the responses to me that enough people are having
problems with installation to justify it.  I'll wait and see if I
receive other responses.

-- Bob
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Kiesling		                    "Durum et durum non faciunt murum."
rak@loft.ann-arbor.mi.us		 	   			-- Anon
vela!plex-1!loft!rak 
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux