I'm Guilty as Charged

How about using tealdeer?

Yep.

That's what the RTFM folks don't seem to understand: if you didn't even know, what you're looking for, you can't look it up.

Or make

I have a theory a lot of people are functionally illiterate and thus prefer videos as they can't skim well

I also like tldr for new commands. Sometimes I discover new ways by using it on the commands I know...

This is nixos.

For those that didn't pick it up, this is sarcasm

I'd say that only those who manage to write a kernel code that doesn't upset Linus Torvald are true linux users.

Enter tldr and navi

Tbh a lot of man pages don't even give you enough usage information to make full use of a package. I'm thinking of the ones which are like an extended --help block

They also usually assume a lot about the users' knowledge of the domain of the program itself.

In my experience, many programs' man/help is very brief, often a sentence or less per command/flag, with 2 or more terms that don't mean anything to the uninitiated. Also, even when I think I know all the words, the descriptions are not nearly precise enough to confidently infer what exactly the program is going to do.
Disclaimers for potentially dangerous/irreversible actions are also often lacking.

Which is why I almost always look for an article that explains a command using examples, instead of trying to divine what the manual authors had in mind.

l must be using man pages very differently from you. To me they are mostly the easy reference to check the available flags for a command, and sometimes the reference on available config file entries, e.g. ssh_config(5)

For those things I was using them quite soon when I started using Linux, because it's quicker than googleing every time if you just need one flag or one option name. For more complex things, like tar-and-gzip in one which needs like four, I still google though.

Probably there are very complicated ones too, the ones explaining subsystems or APIs of the kernel, but those I don't need as a user.

It depends on who writes them, I guess. More "modern" software come with pretty good and concise manpages, meanwhile stuff like the coreutils still have manpages that feel like an incomprehensible mess.

That's one of the reasons why I prefer to run older, enterprise hardware.

There's a good chance, everything has been configured before and most distros work just fine without any tweaking.

I want a stable platform to work on, not another hobby.

"How to do X on Y?" "Why would you ever want to do X? Do Z instead!"

Did you know you can filter search results by time? When it comes to computer questions in particular, I always ask for results from within the past year.

I just wish they'd put some damn usage examples in there. I usually just need to do one thing I don't need a dissertation about it.

No worries!

man man

... I'm in over my head here.

cht () {
    curl cht.sh/$1
}

You can stick this in your .bashrc or .bash_profile. Then just do cht <command to use> and it'll give you the most relevant info to use the command.

Ie. cht tar

Here's a excerpt from man chmod that can be summarized as "You probably want to mark the file you downloaded as executable. Run chmod +x FILENAME"

DESCRIPTION
This manual page documents the GNU version of chmod. chmod changes the file mode bits of each given file according to mode, which can be either a symbolic representation of changes to make, or an octal number representing the bit pattern for the new mode bits.

The format of a symbolic mode is [ugoa...][[-+=][perms...]...], where perms is either zero or more letters from the set rwxXst, or a single letter from the set ugo. Multiple symbolic modes can be given, separated by commas.

A combination of the letters ugoa controls which users' access to the file will be changed: the user who owns it (u), other users in the file's group (g), other users not in the file's group (o), or all users (a). If none of these are given, the effect is as if (a) were given, but bits that are set in the umask are not affected.

The operator + causes the selected file mode bits to be added to the existing file mode bits of each file; - causes them to be removed; and = causes them to be added and causes unmentioned bits to be removed except that a directory's unmentioned set user and group ID bits are not affected.

The letters rwxXst select file mode bits for the affected users: read (r), write (w), execute (or search for directories) (x), execute/search only if the file is a directory or already has execute permission for some user (X), set user or group ID on execution (s), restricted deletion flag or sticky bit (t). Instead of one or more of these letters, you can specify exactly one of the letters ugo: the permissions granted to the user who owns the file (u), the permissions granted to other users who are members of the file's group (g), and the permissions granted to users that are in neither of the two preceding categories (o).

A numeric mode is from one to four octal digits (0-7), derived by adding up the bits with values 4, 2, and 1. Omitted digits are assumed to be leading zeros. The first digit selects the set user ID (4) and set group ID (2) and restricted deletion or sticky (1) attributes. The second digit selects permissions for the user who owns the file: read (4), write (2), and execute (1); the third selects permissions for other users in the file's group, with the same values; and the fourth for other users not in the file's group, with the same values.

chmod doesn't change the permissions of symbolic links; the chmod system call cannot change their permissions on most systems, and most systems ignore permissions of symbolic links. However, for each symbolic link listed on the command line, chmod changes the permissions of the pointed-to file. In contrast, chmod ignores symbolic links encountered during recursive directory traversals. Options that modify this behavior are described in the OPTIONS section.

this is why tldr is so good

tldr is good for this.

https://tldr.sh/

bash: common-sense: command not found

These are the same people who later on complain about Linux being shit because it just breaks

Such people are the main targets of rm -rf trolls.

literally the only reason I installed nano

Nice! Just gonna piggyback and recommend https://tldr.sh too. I use it all the time!

This definitely needs an alias overriding man lol

You just blew my MF mind.

This is cool. Thanks for sharing it.

Sometimes I try to quit my browser with :q or try to send emails with :wq

Dude. Warn me before saying something like that. I'm too high for this... Lol

I do that occasionally when.I don't want to lose/scroll back to the output currently in my terminal (or I want to refer to it while reading the manpage)

A lot of man pages suck ass.

Except openBSD ones, they should be the standard of quality for user documentation.

Hahah true, its a skill issue.

Thihi and sooner or later they all end up at the arch linux wikis.

True but if you're distro offers a good enough user experience then you won't be spending nearly as much time in docs, as opposed to just enjoying your desktop.

Being for more "technical people" is just a lame excuse for bad UX.

man man

whatis man

something related to mansplaining... /s

its a giant wall of text i have never used that can be opened with the terminal command man <othercommand> where <othercommand> is literally any other command