Slashdot Mirror


Unix in a Nutshell

Jason Bennett has sent us a review of one of the O'Reilly staples, UNIX in a Nutshell. Click below to read more. UNIX in a Nutshell author Daniel Gilly pages publisher O'Reilly rating 9/10 reviewer Jason Bennett ISBN 1-56592-001-5 summary One of the most comprehensive UNIX handbooks on the market, and certainly one of the favorite. The ultimate reference, although not recommended for learning UNIX. Background

Greetings, all. This week I'll be "reviewing" one of the books that made the O'Reilly name, UNIX in a Nutshell, although I admit to feeling a little silly passing judgement on a book that has already been judged quite well by the community at large. The first edition of this book was published in December 1986, and has been a mainstay ever since. This particular version is dated June 1998, and professes to include typographical fixes and a new index. For reference, in December 1986 I was working on an IBM PCjr expanded to 640k of RAM and dual 360k floppy drives. My favorite games were Karateka, Flight Simulator II and F-15 Strike Eagle (the first one). How far we've come....

What's the book about?

Simply put, this book is a dictionary of UNIX. It lists every command available with a standard System V, Release 4 or Solaris 2.0 UNIX. This included everything from grep to ed to cc to troff. If you know a command exists, it's listed here along with all its options. That, however, is but a small part of the book. In addition, there are various specific sections covering shells (including sh, ksh and csh), EMACS, vi, ex, awk, sed, nroff/troff, mm/ms/me, various nroff/troff preprocessors, RCS/SCCS, make, sdb/dbx, plus a small beginner's list of important commands. In other words, this is the jack of all trades reference for UNIX (and by extension, the master of none, although I'll cover that later). There is also a transition guide (or at least a small blub) for those used to BSD instead of SysV (of which Linux is a decendent of the later). Many BSD commands included in /usr/ucb on Solaris are listed in the guide as well. In short, if it's standard UNIX (and then some), it's here.

What's Good?

If you want a kitchen-sink reference to UNIX, this is it. Any command that you have a question about is in here. Anytime you have a question about which vi command is needed, it's in here. Shell scripting is covered. Regular expressions are covered, for when you forget when to use "?" and when to use "*" (or "^" or "$"). Want a quick overview to RCS for your web files? It's right here. This is the short, short version of all your man pages that you can put under your pillow at night.

What's Bad?

If you don't know much or anything about UNIX, don't buy this book. Or at least buy an introductory one along with it. Trying to learn UNIX from this book is like trying to learn English by reading the dictionary. Not only is there not much context, you can't do a reverse lookup. If you can't guess at the command you want, you won't be able to find it. That's not necessarily a flaw, this book just wasn't designed to do that. You don't buy the OED for a Spanish speaker, and you don't buy UNIX in a Nutshell for a newbie. In addition, don't buy this book just for its EMACS or vi or RCS section. Those sections are nice, but they are more command lists than guides. O'Reilly has an excellent selection of books dedicated to helping you with one of the above programs. They're great, and I recommend them.

What's In It For Us?

Long-time UNIX fans will love this book, and probably already own a copy. Same with sysadmins. If you've been around enough to know what you're doing, but still have to look up commands, this is also a great book for you. I know I can never remember half the EMACS or vi commands when I need them. The community has voted, and this reference is it. If you need it, buy it.

Buy the book at Amazon.

8 of 39 comments (clear)

  1. Not an O'Reilly Gem by gavinhall · · Score: 3

    Posted by d106ene5:

    This book provides information that can almost entirely be derived from man pages. It adds very little to system documentation already in place (that any unix user should be comfortable using).

    1. Re:Not an O'Reilly Gem by Asim · · Score: 3

      Very true, my friend. And inportant to point out, as any person new to Unix will no doubt miss the man pages initially. People need to know about all sources of information, and how to evaluate them for their own uses.
      And that is the point of this book, IMHO -- that the man pages are not always the most efficent way to find information on commands. A short list of the basic commands can be, in some situations, better to use that having the entire mass of documentation at hand. If one is a relative newbie to intermediate, who knows what s/he wants to do, but not where to find it, it can be more helpful to look in a book than to look in man pages.
      For example, I use 4 books when creating Perl programs here at work; _Programming Perl_, Dave Roth's WinNT Perl book, _Perl in a Nutshell_, and _Perl Cookbook_. Of those, I'd say I use _Perl in a Nutshell_ more than the others. Although all of the infomation is in my online docs, it's simpler and quicker for me to look in the book than to trample through the online docs _if_ it is a simple and direct question. I use more in-depth information when I need to know details.
      And, best of all, you can read it on the toliet, and learn yourelf something there. :)
      Open Source, in general, is about choices. And this book is simply another choice.

    2. Re:Not an O'Reilly Gem by ogren · · Score: 2

      I didn't buy this book for a long time, for this very reason. If I needed to jog my memory, or look up an argument, then I'd use the man pages.

      But now I've started working from home. And I do a lot of my work on a Windows box. (There's some applications that are only available under Win32 that I just can't get around needing. It usually doesn't bother me too much since UNIX is just a telnet client away anyway.) So I spend a lot of my time telnetted into UNIX boxes over a dial-up connection. Which is a pain since searching through a few man entries, with a half dozen screens of text each, can be slow enough to be annoying.

      I used to get around this by just reaching over to the next keyboard, which is my home Linux box. But on a whim, and based off of my success with Java in a Nutshell, I decided to pick up UNIX in a Nutshell. And I've used it more than I thought I would. Sometimes it's just handy to have a dead-tree version of the docs around. Screen real estate is just too valuable sometimes. If I'm in the middle of typing a long command line, sometimes it's easier to flip open a book to verify the parameter instead of opening a new telnet session or window to fire up man. I've even considered getting the UNIX CD Bookshelf in which UNIX in a Nutshell is included in both hard copy and electronic copy. I haven't, since UNIX in a nutshell is probably the most valuable reference book of the bunch, and I've already forked over my $20 to O'Reilly for that one.

      The bottom line: There's nothing groundbreaking about this book. All of the information is available elsewhere, and for free. Because of that, it's probably not an O'Reilly "gem". But if spend a decent amount of time in man, and you have 20 bucks (plus shipping) to spare, it's a well compiled reference that might be worthwhile to add to your library.

    3. Re:Not an O'Reilly Gem by Butch · · Score: 2

      > Hell, even GNU disses manpages in favor of "info"!
      ...which is high on the list of irritating GNU mistakes.
      Does anyone actually like all those "Warning: This man page
      is updated only occasionally" man pages GNU supplies?
      Beyond that, does anyone actually prefer using 'info'
      to man?

  2. Recommended.... by Yxes · · Score: 2
    If you are more likely to have a book handy than the man pages. Personally, I am so I use this book a great deal but others may not.

    Nevertheless...

    The book lists for a whopping $24.95 and if you get it from Amazon you only pay $19.96. Through the help of other /. readers I have a program on the web that found it for only $12.95 (48% OFF) from powells. If your interested the source code is available in a developers edition and you can find lowest price here:

    Unix in a Nutshell

    The program speciallizes in O'Reillys but you can find any book. Each night I build a list of every O'Reilly and with one click you can find the cheapest price.
    -----------
    Resume

  3. hi by _brute_ · · Score: 2

    I find Essential System Administration (also from ORA) is the absolute bomb.

    If your looking for a good UNIX reference that is a great book.

    its a great 'practical' reference and worth every penny.

    figured I would throw that out if your planning to buy a book on system administration to act as a UNIX reference this is definetly what you should get.

  4. pulp fiction by z1lch · · Score: 2

    this is the bedside volume which will be collecting dust in gibson-esque style roadside tech hotels of the future.

    modern day companion to the book of genesis.

    --
    BLAMMO shaken not stirred
  5. Paucity of Documentation Plagues Free Software by Tom+Christiansen · · Score: 5
    An anonymous coward scribbled:
    Man pages are too-kitchen sink for the clueful-newbie.
    Apparently you have a different definition of `clueful' than I have.
    ... manpages aren't required in SysV (they're a BSD-ism) ...
    I must take issue with this notion that `manpages are a BSDism'. You are demonstrably wrong: they were included with Version 7, as this manpage clearly indicates. And your statement about SysV is also wrong: manpages are required on any system that purports POSIX compliance, as AIX learned the hard way.

    Unfortunately, technically speaking, only catpages not manpages are required. Perhaps that's what you meant. But even catpages are better than nothing.

    ...even GNU disses manpages ...
    This hardly constitutes a fine selling point in your favor. Sometimes the FSF pertains more to the problem set than they do the solution set; this is certainly one of those places. Not only do they ignore the POSIX requirements, they appear to disavow the need for a unified, indexable, searchable, printable, formalized set of technical documentation. This is hardly what most of us would call `progress'.

    It's bad enough when you summon up a manpage only to be infuriatingly chidden by the FSF that `This documentation is no longer being maintained and may be inaccurate or incomplete.' Worse still is the situation with programs like diff or gnomecal, which are completely bereft of any manpage whatsoever. The FSF should be ashamed of themselves! This is one of the root causes of the notorious Daemon Linux project.

    This lackadaisical attitude toward complete, on-line documentation is hardly confined to the FSF, although I hold them ultimately responsible for one area: Linux distributors. The Linux rebundlers inherit the problem from the FSF, and do nothing about it. Take SuSE for example. In virtually all other aspects a robust and coherent Linux distribution, SuSE confesses in their printed book that accompanies their CD that not all commands and functions have documentation. What a punt! They're just being irresponsible.

    I suppose that one could in desperation invent some sort of rarefied alibi for the FSF's negligence here. They are, after all, more dedicated to principle than they are to mundane matters of quotidian utility. But for those who repackage and sell Linux distributions, no excuse can exist. These businesses are selling what they purport to be an integrated system, yet then have the audacity to confess that it is not. If the FSF won't fix this, then the resellers must. But the FSF really is the right place to fix it, because that way the fix helps everyone, rather than just one reseller trying to create a market advantage for themselves.

    But this already depressing situation gets worse, far worse, before it gets better. You see, as programmers try to create something flashy enough to attract non-programmers, something critical has been lost. I'm thinking of those programs whose GUIs are the Way, the Truth, and the Light, whereby no man cometh unto the documentation for a given program save through its lauded GUI. If the information is not found under an About button or a Help button, it simply isn't available. Even if it were to be found there, how would you know it? Once you figure out each program's new set of hieroglyphics, these miserable shinyhappy icons and their cascading shinyhappy menus just aren't greppable. How do you in a non-manual fashion search through these myriad menus? How do you print them out? How do you create an index?

    This situation in completely unacceptable.

    Having recently tried out the whole Eterm, Enlightenment, and Gnome set-up, as duly impressed as I was with Eterm's manpage, I was severely underwhelmed by the attention toward detailed -- strike that, make it any -- documentation manifest in the other two. Miguel has assured me that what I had looked at was a mistake, that the released snuck out without the libraries' docs included. But I want more than only the programming libraries having manpages. If it's a command or a file format, it needs to be documented! Otherwise we're back to the mushroom school of systems management (keep us in the dark and feed us shit). Every little gnomic panel application and associated happycon needs a manpage, one that apropos and whatis can access, as well. Don't make me click with a mouse to find help and directions. I didn't spend thirty years mastering the keyboard and learning to read and write lengthy treatises merely to be reduced to a one-bit input device and a two-line output device.

    Having to randomly hunt through manpages, HOWTOs, info pages, various programs' home pages out on the Web, per-program help pages, and stringsing the infernal binaries is shear madness As Henry Spencer observed, `Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.' Unified Unix manpages solved the insane situation in which you had shelves upon shelves of printed documentation that came with an IBM mainframe; these docs weren't online, so were unnavigable. Apparently we are doomed to repeat that unhappy history.

    While it's true that I write all my books in troff, along with the traditional helpmates of eqn, pic, and tbl, please don't assume by this that I am particularly enamoured of that system. I'm certainly not. What I do expect in proper online documentation is the properties that manpages provide:

    • All documentation must be contained and accessible from within the same on-line system.
    • Available for independent on-line viewing, apart from the application.
    • Format easy to read and write by humans, parse and generate by programs.
    • Conveniently structured.
    • Printable as a high-quality book using a typesetter.
    • Searchable and indexable using standard tools.
    The language used to encode this information is far less important than is having these basic features. Without a coherent, comprehensive, and unified documentation system, we might as well all be running some expert-hostile and user-obsequious toybox suitable for the point-and-drool atechnical public all too typical in these post-literate Dark Ages, where WYSIWYG means that what you see is all you get.

    --tom