Anyway on Debian to format a pendrive to Fat32 I use one command:
newfs_msdos /dev/da0
-I
flag you use even bypasses a safety check that prevents doing just that). It can cause a lot of problems and even on Linux you really need to use fdisk
or sysutils/gdisk first; the FreeBSD base equivalent of such is gpart(8). mkfs.fat
(Linux), format
(Windows).… the Handbook doesn't have a section that explains to the new comers how to do something trivial as formatting a USB pendrive into a FAT32 file systems.
msdosfs
example, but does not show how to deal with a drive that does not already use msdosfs
… four commands to format a USB Pendrive looks a little bit cumbersome... ?
… Does gray on white text rather than black on white text reduce or induce eye strain? …
… A common false belief is that full black on full white is the best contrast. …
… contrast …
… I also improved more things in dark and high contrast themes. …
What does newfs_msdos /dev/da0 do?I would like to point out the Handbook doesn't have a section that explains to the new comers how to do something trivial as formatting a USB pendrive into a FAT32 file systems.
I ended up following this website: https://www.adminbyaccident.com/freebsd/how-to-freebsd/how-to-format-an-usb-drive-on-freebsd/
Also using four commands to format a USB Pendrive looks a little bit cumbersome... ?
What happened with grahamperrin ?
Hmm, yes, we can add some kind of generation infoThanks for your continuing effort!
Especially in the pdf version of the Handbook, I'd welcome a precise version number/date of generation; e.g. on the "Abstract page". More importantly, I'd appreciate a header or footer in the pdf output that contains the relevant version information as mentioned on the "Abstract" page. That may be something like "This manual covers FreeBSD 13.2-RELEASE and 12.4-RELEASE", but anything shorter that at least mentions 13.2 and 12.4 I'd be happy with.
Hi ,What changes do you want to see in the new (no so new now) in the documentation portal?
Hi ,
I think readability could be improve by:
1) reducing the width of the index on the left and removing the TOC on the right (not sure it is useful to have both, once you reach a chapter, items are already there on the left)
2) removing the top navbar AND the footer because they both take a lot of space and IMO those don't belong in documentation pages, you don't see that often.
I won't lie since the new layout is there I don't read handbook online anymore just because of what I've said before, instead I prefer to read the PDF via zathura in full screen, it's a better experience for me BUT I like what have been done with the index on the left with the search bar it's convenient , the dark and light theme are also nice to have.
I already said that in another comment (I am sorry for repeating myself) but why not using/forking an existing tool meant for that task instead of starting from scratch, it's less work for a better result.
Thank you for asking and for your work.
He's changed his avatar himself. And I guess his new responsibilities are taken up a lot of his time.He hasn't posted anything more than an year and his avatar is removed.
Maybe he is not very active on the forums. On reddit is.He hasn't posted anything more than an year and his avatar is removed.
From my point of view they are the same 3 columns style like the handbook, sorry I don't like it, I prefer the one you linked before the doc.rust-lang , it's simple TOC/index doesn't get in your way there is no header no footer, it is just plain text without distraction.Regarding this type of structuring, may I know what you think of [1] and [2] then?
Thank you, that is a good starting point.I'll reduce the height of the header and I can make it to don't be sticky, so if you make scroll you will don't see it
The width of the index colums on the left and right are fixed, when they are present. When making the browser window narrower, there comes a moment when only the text column remains; for a wide screen monitor that means displaying the bowser in half a screen-width it'll display only the text (as do the other referenced external websites). Using Firefox, at ca. 2/3 screen width both "extra" colums disappear and the text column remains.I think readability could be improve by:
1) reducing the width of the index on the left and removing the TOC on the right (not sure it is useful to have both, once you reach a chapter, items are already there on the left)
I don't care for it, but don't feel as strongly about it as you do. It is too crowded and busy. I like the option to collapse them as stated in bullet point 1 of #109.I am aware that I am speaking for myself here while there are probably many people that actually like the new layout so ...
He hasn't posted anything more than an year and his avatar is removed.
Maybe he is not very active on the forums. On reddit is.
Yeah but you see the paradox, to have a clean layout one have to shrink the window.The width of the index colums on the left and right are fixed, when they are present. When making the browser window narrower, there comes a moment when only the text column remains; for a wide screen monitor that means displaying the bowser in half a screen-width it'll display only the text (as do the other referenced external websites). Using Firefox, at ca. 2/3 screen width both "extra" colums disappear and the text column remains.
No need to apology you didn't not fail, you brought modern design and that's good.I’m gonna improve the doc portal with all your comments.
I’m gonna remove the right TOC too and leave only the left menu.
About the fixed size, it’s true, my idea was to make it with media queries, as I see, I’m failed
I’ll try to improve all of that ASAP
My apologies for the inconvenience.
Agree, TBH most of the listed ideas are interesting.I don't care for it, but don't feel as strongly about it as you do. It is too crowded and busy. I like the option to collapse them as stated in bullet point 1 of #109.