| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Message-ID: <3E9FF611.149129A2@mit.edu> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 08:56:49 -0400 From: Jonathan Reed <jdreed@MIT.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Hawkinson <jhawk@mit.edu> CC: Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu>, bugs@mit.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Hawkinson wrote: > > Do you think current situation is oK? It's infrequent to hear people > flailing trying to find update_ws. > > I'm kind of skeptical on the console login thing. People run it under > X all the time and I don't think there's any widespread perception > that that is not ok... Well, the PWOG does explicitly say that you should type C-p at the login screen and run it in console mode. And really, people should be reading the PWOG if they're going to run update_ws. I'm curious about this concept that "people don't know where update_ws is". A cursory dsgrep through OLC transactions reveals that of all of our questions mentioning update_ws, they were in two primary categories: -How do I update my machine? (which implies they don't know the process, so knowing where update_ws is isn't going to help) -update_ws failed with these errors, what do I do now? We didn't have any that said "I can't find update_ws" or "update_ws: command not found". -Jon
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |