RTFM
2mon 22d ago by lemmus.org/u/blakemavrix in linux@lemmy.ml
Hello Linux community.
I'd like to take a moment to explain what I hope will be a simple concept (so really it's more of a reminder) that everyone should say least know and understand.
Not everyone (myself included) learns best by RTFM. Some of us need a guiding hand or to watch a video instead. It's not that we're lazy or don't like reading, it's just that it doesn't work efficiently enough.
RTFM long predates videos in the internet; at this point I'd actually call it inclusive of videos and guides.
I actually get pretty pissed off when the only guide for a feature beyond a couple lines of "here's what this can do" with no elaboration is just a video. I don't want a video. I want a damn manual with working examples.
But if its all there is, I'll watch it before asking questions. The same should go for people who prefer videos, they should at least try the manual first, or looking at some guides or videos.
What's frustrating for people (generically speaking) is when zero attempt is made in advance of posting questions, and from what I see, is the majority of "RTFM" responses.
Oh I hate how everything is a video. Sometimes I just want text so I can ship to relevant section.
It drives me nuts.
At least provide a transcript somewhere. Thats all I ask.
I suggest to replace RTFM by WHYTSF : What Have You Tried So Far.
The goal isn't to blame or guilt trip anyone, rather it's to genuinely help and for that others need to know... WHYTSF?!
I've tried nothing and I'm all out of ideas.
That is great, it puts the onus on the asker to prove they tried something
sadly dwarfed by YouTube videos that are outdated as soon as they are produced, and web guides nobody maintains. worse, AI scrapers only know this outdated information and happily hallucinate based on it it is EXHAUSTING having users cheer and celebrate the placebo of all the made up bullshit that does nothing in their config or worse breaks everything in unpredictable ways
AI scrapers only know this outdated information
While I have experienced this (quite a lot), it's much easier to spend five minutes figuring this out with an AI than it is to spend an hour trying to work that out by searching forums for answers.
I have a suggestion for those that don't have a burning hatred of all things AI or Google - try NotebookLM (https://notebooklm.google/) which is FREE for limited usage. It may take you a few tries to learn how to use it effectively *there are videos showing how) but what you can do is give it a list of URL's on any topic. These can be man pages, wiki links, PDF documents, links to specific posts or discussion forums, YouTube videos, or almost anything that can be accessed via a link. You can include up to 50 links for free (up to 10 at a time, I think it is a bug that if you try to add more than 10 at once it just silently fails and then you have to go to a different "notebook" and come back to try again).
Then when you have added all your links, you can ask for a summary of the material, or ask specific questions based just on the links you have added (no more outdated responses). You can even do things like generate graphics or audio "podcasts" or even videos with really bad visuals (IMHO) based on your links collection if you want to. But what I find is when dealing with complex material it often makes connections that I would never have seen. And did I mention it's free for limited usage? You just need a Google account to use it (and yes I realize that's a non-starter for some people, and no I would never ever include anything personal in my links or requests).
I hate it when AI hallucinates an answer but I REALLY hate it when I try to ask a question and some smug know-it-all tells me I just want to be spoon fed the answers and didn't do any research on my own. Usually if I am to the point of writing a post asking for help I have tried the usual ways of finding answers (at least the ones that work for me - man pages decidedly do not) and I'm at the point where yes, I WOULD like to be just spoon-fed the answer if you know it (or at least a relevant link), thank you very much. More than once I have got REALLY pissed off at a guy like that and then usually I'm the one that gets censored or booted out of the forum, while the know-it-all goes on to find another victim to bully. Oh, and then there are the moderators who censor "low quality" posts (except from their friends and users they like).
So when AI came along, I found it much easier to ask it and try to work through the hallucinations than to deal with that, and I suspect a whole lot of other people felt the same, and that is one reason why sites like Stack Exchange saw participation fall off a cliff. And AI keeps getting better and (so far at least) has never once criticized me for not trying hard enough to find something on my own. I get some people want challenges in their lives, but not everyone does and even those who like to be challenged now and then don't always want it to be in the same areas of their lives. There are people who enjoy running in marathons but who would hate any friction at all when trying to use their computer.
Why not man pages though? That's a very fast way of finding answers.
I find AI way more up to date then searching.
For me RTFM just means “show us you tried something yourself before reaching out for help”. In other words that you tried putting some work in and not just trying to get someone else to do your work or thinking for you.
I’m very happy to help someone willing to learn, but detest helping someone too lazy to do anything themselves.
That's a fair point.
Long time linux user: The worse problem is they don't even tell WHICH manual is relevant to the issue.
"How do I make my secondary drive auto-decrypt?" "RTFM"
Could have at least said "man crypttab 5" so that I don't have to waste 3 hours just trying to find the starting point.
"They". That's one sort of people who does RTFM the wrong way in my opinion. If I do RTFM, even for obvious simple ones, I most likely point to where to look at, ideally with a link. I do not RTFM literally, but saying there is some documentation and pointing to it usually. To me just saying RTFM (literally with this acronym) is rude, especially if someone already struggles and asks basic questions. Not everyone is "they".
The idea of RTFM is that if you have questions, then we are all on same page with basic information found in the manual. I mean you expect others explain what is already said in the manual. Its like asking how to use your microwave oven, even if you have the manual right at your hand. Now, if the manual is unclear or difficult to understand, that is a different story. Then you can at least say you didn't understand it. The point is, that you did something before (your homework) and looked at the obvious places like the manual (and maybe further websearch).
People don't like others being lazy and asking the questions that doesn't need to be asked. That's why RTFM exist. As much as you might take the "RTFM" as an offending answer, those people think of you question as offending too. Now there are people who use this term loosely in places when it is not appropriate. Also it depends on the audience. If your grandma tries to use a browser to watch funny cat videos, and asks how to use it, then it would be inappropriate to say RTFM. But if you have a Linux user who asks about how to use grep, then I think it is an appropriate reply.
RTFM is mostly a flex that people who got help before you are now referring to because they are already on the boat.
That said, a rudimentary Web search or maybe a llm question, might be in order before asking. You also learn more when you get those little successes by yourself.
While I agree that a little search is good for everyone, if no one asks questions publicly then no one has anything to find. I don't trust llm accuracy so I don't recommend that.
While not a reliable source on its own, it can usually point you in the right direction.
do you mean man pages? man pages are awesome. man is like the biggest deal command in unix.
Ι must say that Arch Linux's wiki pages are easily understood. But man pages are not. I can't follow the standard manual format. Just like with IKEA instructions, they just don't make sense to me. My brain is like that. But Arch Linux pages are good.
there's a standardized man format? News to me. I thought developers just threw everything in at random order.
RTFM doesn't have to literally mean to read text, just like saying "let me google that for you" doesn't have to literally be google. Both statements are similar; the point is instead of burdening others with teaching you something, go learn it on your own whether that be the manual or random Indian tech youtuber.
RTFMP - I’d read the man pages if I could decipher them. 😁
Mostly /s
I can relate : I'm a noob. I often don't understand the manual, so I look for forum posts that are clearer/ easier to follow/more directly related to my problem and most of the time I find some.
I can't count the number of times I swear I read every man page and I can't figure out how to structure my arguments--especially when they are nested or conditional.
I especially wish more man pages had common examples. Sometimes an example can say more than a paragraph of explanation.
I feel like you'd love tldr.
I especially wish more man pages had common examples.
A thousand times this. It's all well and good telling us what each option does, but if we don't know how to form the command around the various arguments and paths, then it's all fairly useless.
Caddy when I was trying to learn setting up encrypted hello.
"RTFM" (or similar comments like "it's in the docs") are just mean and useless without a reference.
Like, okay, superior user in the internet: If it's in the manual/docs, what page? Do you have a link? Could you quote the relevant section?
Often people ask because they couldn't find the answer in the docs. Simply pointing them at the answer is infinitely better than "lol the answer is in there somewhere"
See also: "Let me Google that for you..." Like mf Google brought me to this thread!
I agree that "RTFM" can be insensitive, and even mean. However, the place it comes from is genuine. It's nobodies job to tell you exactly what page to look at. If you've dug through the docs and still can't find your answer, make it explicit that you've searched the manual, and perhaps be explicit about parts you don't quite understand.
The whole "RTFM" thing was born from people asking for help when they obviously hadn't made a proper try themselves first.
Yeah, that's what I meant by "the manual". Though I suppose the Linux community is the most likely to be flipping through a physical book to figure out their bash script.
What's worse, is if this is GNU-ware, there is a good chance the answer IS NOT IN THE MAN PAGE. I think it was bash or maybe gawk. I don't remember exactly, but I had a question that simply wasn't answered in each man page. GNU docs are absolute trash, written without any consideration for the audience.
I think GNU favors the info tool, try that if the man page is lacking.
I feel like every time I've gone looking for an info page, it was just the man page content, but now I've got some useless shit I installed.
I mean, maybe this is a debian thing.
It's a skill like any other. When you need to look up something, make yourself at least try tldr, man, etc. first. Over time you will find yourself skimming through man pages to find what you need faster than looking up a video.
As a rule I don't tell people to RTFM, because it has some rude dismissive connotations, although I will share when it helps me solve a problem I've been butting up against that would've been solved if I had just read the docs.
That being said, I do encourage people to read the docs, as others' walkthroughs can be misinformational, and are usually tied to specific setups or software and hardware versions. It requires learning how to wade through a lot of information to find the info you need, but the info is usually guaranteed to be the most current and reliable.
That all being said, I'm more than happy to help when people want it.
I am not an expert but I will help you where I can!
That's all most of us noobs ever actually ask for, and it's usually after we've gone through all the troubleshooting steps we know to do.
I started my development career working on a VAX-VMS system. We had a large cupboard full of documentation for the OS, and it contained every answer I needed. Multiple volumes of documentation!
It was so much better reading official the docs to understand how a particular system call worked. And very gratifying being able to internally say “I worked it out for myself!”. I miss those days.
There's a manual?
😆
it’s just that it doesn’t work efficiently enough.
Yeah, but we live in a world of limited resources. in particular labor and specifically knowledgeable linux nerds willing to answers questions for free. If everyone will have that mindset there won't be a lot of time left to answer the difficult questions .
With that said i agree that occasionally if its done its probably no big deal, there is also linux 4 noobs for those who want to ask some questions to help getting started with linux.
Tealdeer.
If it's a more complex subject matter i can understand people asking questions, because in those cases the documentation can also be more difficult to understand. I've asked questions in those situations myself as well, and a video of someone walking you through it can be very helpful. When someone asks the most basic questions ever i tend to be more on the RTFM side of things though. If you ask a question that literally has like a oneliner answer in the manual it seems to me like you didn't put in that much effort before posting. I never actually RTFM'd someone though. I either answer anyway if i feel generous, or i just ignore it lol.
From the beginning of computing there has been a problem with bootstrapping knowledge... the person creating a tool gives it a name, and describes it, but knowing that someone solved the problem you have and what the name of that tool was always a challenge.
But that is nothing new... you posted in English but if you were to learn a different language you would have a very similar problem, and one of the most universal strategies for making that transition is to drill on vocabulary. Once you have built a small vocabulary then you can expand it using a dictionary.
The real message behind someone saying RTFM is that there are so many educational and search resources now that asking some rando on the Internet to rewrite a Howto on the fly is lazy. Simply typing the exact same question into Google will bring up a kickstarter set of vocabulary and resources. If you actually do this your question will often answer itself, and if it doesn't and you start by pointing out why your efforts failed to help you with your specific problem and use the vocabulary (at least briefly) that your research turned up to guide the reader toward where your problem is, you should get less RTFM responses.
additionally, and i'm sorry to say this, the fm often sucks. me being an enterprise architect by (one of my) trade(s), would usually benefit from an architecture or a systems sequence diagram... well this is rarely there :D and i'm saying this being a guy who originally learned to linux by methodically reading through, processing, and trial-and-erroring the complete set of man pages of my first distro, back in 97 or whatever.
Not to mention, RTfM is not always possible for some distros like NixOS where the documentation is weaker than for other more mainstream distros.
With NixOS source code is the manual!
then you might be in over your head and shouldnt use what you are not able to use
That’s a round about way of saying RTFM, but even less welcoming. Probably not the kind of thing anyone should be told…
i see it more like telling somebody to weightlift 50kg first instead of immediately going for 500kg
What are you talking about?, NixOS documentation is one of the best ones around, not to mention that with just being pointed to the approximate direction of something and having a good text editor you can figure out things quite easily and without risk of breaking your system. I've recently switched from Arch and honestly as good as documentation is on Arch, I prefer NixOS one.
I am talking from experience here. Some of the documentation is out of date, some is meant for Channel NixOS installs and not so appropriate for Flake-based installs.
Most of the fixes for my issues I find across NixOS discourse forum posts, or in the subreddit of the other platform. The Wiki/official documentation is not enough.
I’m glad you switched to NixOS (welcome!) but this is gap in documentation is something that will become more apparent over time. The NixOS official wiki ironically often links to Arch wiki to explain certain concepts further.
What am I missing? There should be no difference from "normal" to flake installs on anything NixOS related, only in syntax of the language itself since you're wrapping things. I've gone flakes and now somewhat dendritic and haven't had to check NixOS docs for anything (only nix language docs and other people's configs to see how they solved certain language specific peculiarities)
Uh… is the NixOS documentation “one of the best around” or have you never checked it? It really can’t be both.
Understand, I’m not trying to criticize NixOS. I use NixOS exclusively and it’s my daily driver. But the documentation really isn’t all there, and it’s not centralized. The best solutions you find across forums, blog posts, random wikis, and by checking other people’s configs like you said.
But yes, the fact you can test things without fear of breaking your system allows you to make hundreds of mistakes stress-free. That’s one of the best features about NixOS.
I've checked the NixOS documentation extensively for setting things up, my point was that I hadn't had to do so for migrating to flakes, as that's not a NixOS thing, but rather a Nix language thing.
Sure if it's in the Wiki the documentation is not too bad. But just looking for the documention of the lib functions via DuckDuckGo is somehow really hard. And if it's not in the Wiki or you want the home-manager module, I'll basically default to first looking at the options on 3rd party websites and then reading the source code for them. (Also the NixOS wiki is obviously not as comprehensive / big as the Arch Wiki)
Are you not aware of https://search.nixos.org/optionsor https://nix-community.github.io/home-manager/options.xhtml? You can search all available options, sometimes with links to the docs for the thing they set for extra context. Those are both official docs and are derived from the code that you're already looking at.
The first one is fine but it always seems like it shows a huge amount of packages, just not the one I'm looking for, also I don't find nixos options on there. For that like using mynixos. I really like being able to click on a parent options and see all of it's children (They also show some home-manager stuff). And the options page for home-manager is a horrible user experience. For that I usually use extranix.com. Thanks though.
RTFM makes more sense in a professional context. I don't expect anybody to read anything unless 1 they want to or 2 they are being paid to
Saying RTFM in a hobby or recreational space is just being an asshole for no good reason
Meh.... There have been a whole lot of braindead "pls do it for me" posts going around since the influx of windows refugees.
I'm not one to be a prick about answering questions to help out, and we all start somewhere, but "help me get steam and my LLM working on Kali linux" where ppl get in way over their heads is becoming a real problem. Worse, they will call the linux community toxic for suggesting they need more fundamentals first.
I interpret the post title as a general "try your best, and come to us when you're stuck".
i'm not seeing that stuff much but i do believe you
Counterpoint: Aside from disabilities which specifically impact reading, why wouldn't someone want to read when it comes to their hobbies? A hobby is something one intentionally devotes time to, typically unpaid and nonprofessionally, because they enjoy it and they want to learn more about it. A large amount of my enjoyment is derived from learning more about the things I enjoy, so not wanting to consume that information makes no sense to me.
I can understand, for example, gaming as a hobby and wanting quick answers if one is jumping ship from Windows to Linux. Linux isn't the hobby there; just a means to an end. I'd still argue the gamer should develop some level of proficiency with their underlying OS. Otherwise it's like having trail riding as a hobby without any knowledge or tools to patch a tube, tension a chain or tighten a bolt. One might end up in a situation where they can't just get an instant answer. Investing a little time in the mechanics could keep a short ride from turning into a long trudge out with a bike over the shoulder.
In the context of "Linux", broadly, as a hobby - what even is that hobby if it isn't making an honest effort to learn broadly about various tools, the kernel, scripting and programming languages, and so forth? Linux always struck me as a hobby for people who collect hobbies. Or people that have "learning" as a hobby. It's why, while I'll probably never work a day of my life in IT, I know how to do some basic SQL queries, hit an API and parse the JSON, do a little scripting in Bash and Python, utilize a load of CLI tooling much more efficiently than any Windows GUI I've ever used, and so on. I'll never know it all but part of the fun is trying anyway.
just because you find it fun doesn't mean everyone does. i know a couple Linux users who see Linux as a worthwhile chore: boring, frustrating, annoying, but ultimately worthwhile to get away from Microsoft or to gain functionality Windows does not have.
I agree that Linux is also often a step to the actual hobby: gaming, self-hosting, photography, audio production. I empathize with someone reluctant to learn the ins and outs of Unix file ownership when they are just trying to make beats without paying Microsoft. Sure the knowledge is rewarding, but i can't blame a person for not grokking it the first time when on the surface is seems pointless
If someone is making an effort to learn and doesnt take my time for granted i'm happy to help them.
Also man pages are usually good but lots of software half-asses them these days
Exactly!
"It's not a professional's job to read the manuals they need to know for their job unless I specifically tell them to" is an interesting take. A really stupid one but interesting non-the-less...
I think you misinterpreted their message. Their argument is that it's an expectation that the professional RTFM (more accurately, to have already done so) which shouldn't carry over to hobbyists. At least not as strictly. Put another way, "The certified Toyota technician needs to have the fancy book learnin' while the weekend wrencher or shadetree mechanic shouldn't be held to the same standard."
I disagree insofar as, short of inaccessible resources (sadly becoming more common in my automotive example) or a lack of time and money, there's no reason a hobbyist shouldn't strive to educate themselves and achieve professional level of excellence. So long as they enjoy it, anyway. That's really the point of a hobby.
the problem was that nobody paid ooops@feddit.org to read any of this
Not working efficiently enough is the key. RTFM is a skill and it takes patience and practice. Investing that time is worth it as it is ultimately the fastest way. And you learn peripheral information along the way. If getting the job done now, then do what works for you.
I would however warn against watching video. Watching videos is the slowest way to learn something. Think about how often you watch at 4x only to jump around and miss what you are looking for. Compare that to using a wiki or an old fashion book. Skimming and jumping around is much easier. But once again, do what works for you.
Tl;dr.
RTFM was the old way and no one should be doing it anymore; who has been doing it to you?
I know It'll be a controversial take on here; but while I don't like the use of AI for most things, I've found LLMs to be immensely valuable when it comes to learning how to Linux, and as an extension, how to self host.
I understand the limitations, but it's so much more straightforward to tell an LLM what I'm trying to achieve then follow those instructions, than it is to try and poke about from site to site trying to piece together the information. Particularly if you don't know what it is you need to search for in the first place.
Obviously you have to exercise some caution, but it makes so much more sense to me to confirm instructions provided by an LLM than it is to try and figure out where to even start. And let's be honest, not all forum users are as forgiving to complete noobs.
The problem with using an LLM for information is that you can ask chatgpt:
"please provide me with 3 different interpretations of the main function of the Linux command 'ls'"
and you'll get what you ask for. An llm is an inappropriate tool to lookup accurate information.
I've found LLM's to be useful as well. I wouldn't have Jellyfin running on my home server now if it wasn't for an LLM, and it was the first service I learned how to run. But an LLM has also sent me into a loop of testing out the same few prompts over and over again and expecting different results.
No, fuck you.
If you want to use the community computer you have to actually put forth the effort to learn how to do it. There is no excuse in 2026, vast mountains of educational material in every format written for every combination of medium and cognition are available at an instant.
From your perspective it would be easier and more efficient if people made videos, or talked you through it. From everyone else’s perspective it’s a big waste of time when they could be doing literally anything else and you will end up with a stronger understanding when you do it yourself.
That’s not to say people won’t help you, just that you should put forth the effort to learn so you don’t burden the community, such as it is, with your simple requests.
Alternately, you don’t have to use linux. Windows is a perfectly good operating system, macos is a perfectly good operating system.
I dunno man, I want my friends and family using Linux. I don’t think this is the right mentality.
People still converse over simple facts. What does the plant that grows cinnamon look like? Who won the Super Bowl in x year? Simple facts that could easily just be looked up, but people like talking to each other.
Even reading off a Wikipedia page to someone else, you get an opportunity to cater the tone, pace, and omissions / additional clarity to whomever you’re talking to.
The drop in Stack Overflow questions shows that if people can’t get helpful answers from other humans, they will get them from AI.
this is an absolutely toxic take of the issue. I took OP's statement as less of a "I won't read the manual" and more of a "I struggle to be able to read manuals"
Which is fully fair , there are many times I had read the manual, and then had to look up the issue further anyway because I either missed the poorly written section, or misunderstood what it was saying.
If you want a prime example of that, go look at ffmpeg and try to figure out how to select a specific language for subtitles on a video without looking it up online. its via -map as an advanced option, which is described as a parameter to extract specific streams (which also means they would need to map the video and the audio streams since including a -map removes every auto stream). but map doesn't tell you subtitle tracks are index:s. it does tell you that you can look at stream specifiers for valid search options, which does include s as a type, and lets you know that you can use m for metadata tagging, but you would need to make the connection that the type is s, and the meta data search flag would be m:language:langcode, and you need to make the connection the entire string has to be concated so its index:s:m:language:langcode For someone who is learning ffmpeg and video transcoding, that is not a very good setup. The stream specifiers give a few examples of what the potentials are but, the location where it specifies the types are in a different area than the one where it specifies the metadata keys. At that point just asking online or searching is way easier.
Note: this is just an issue I have see people come across because ffmpeg is one of the more complicated programs (the man page is over 2300 lines)
is it in the manual? yes. is someone who doesn't know how to use ffmpeg and is trying to learn it going to find it? that's debatable.
If I was in that situation, my next step would be googling it, and if I couldn't find it via searching, I would be reaching out to communities. At that point "RTFM" is useless to me.
No, you’re wrong.
People who still feel like they aren’t being coddled enough when it comes to linux help in the year of our lord 2026 are the toxic ones. Assistance with every possible problem exists in every imaginable format and with focus on a dazzling array of backgrounds and levels of comprehension.
At some point when you’re set loose in the library and can’t find out about locomotive axle layouts it’s your own fault.
NOBODY LEARNS BEST BY RTFM BUT WE DO IT ANYWAY SUCK IT UP