Subject: Re: bug#7523: chmod example in docs

From: Paul Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:34:35 -0800

>> > I've gotta give it to Microsoft, they get their manuals right.

Sorry, but I had to laugh at that one.

Here's a quote from a Microsoft manual on this very topic:

  chmod   A UNIX command meaning "change module."

which is bogus, of course: even someone with only passing acquaintance
with chmod should know that the "mod" doesn't stand for module.
(Even Wikipedia's page on chmod is better that Microsoft's on this point.)

A note at the start of that Microsoft page says:

  "No warranty is made as to technical accuracy."

which is a remark that you can take the bank, when reading
Microsoft manuals.

I'm not saying GNU manuals are perfect.  Far from it!  But
we should not aim for being merely as good as Microsoft manuals,
as that would be far too low a target.  In many cases they're
not much better than Wikipedia, and all too often they're worse.

My sources:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc749930.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chmod