>Great documentation? Yes.
Compared to BSD's, mediocre and subject to dramatic changes by nature.
Compared to BSD's, mediocre and subject to dramatic changes by nature.
This year I have done short reviews of FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD. IMHO the docs for Arch are more helpful than any of theirs.
help #in the terminal.
man afterboot
You could say *BSD documentation is more "comprehensive" but I usually find myself wading through an ocean to find what I'm looking for. On top of that, every time you try to look elsewhere, you just see RTFM. I can respect the sentiment, but having different variations of the same documentation can help understanding imo
I think Arch generally got its philosophy right. It’s pretty much the minimal set of tools to get an easy to update binary distribution. They don’t touch what they don’t have to.