What do you think of a troubleshooting FAQ / database?

[aysiu]

Usually when I see threads titled something like A CS major's experience of 3 months (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=451786), I cringe--knowing what "original" suggestions lie within.

The OP, however, brings up a good point:
Documentation. There needs to be a page of documentation of very common common problems in Ubuntu. Problems such as "my video drivers stopped working", "X won't start", "grub gives an error", "how to change my undetected screen resolution". The CORRECT ways to do these things are documented but they are scattered around and not easily accessible, especially if you don't even know the terms for what the problem is. This is a long standing argument against Linux that is unfortunately still true. This isn't something we need to wait on Ubuntu for. We as a community can do this.

So two questions:

1. Should we do this? Is this necessary? Or we should we rely on Google and forum searches to find the answers to problems?

2. How should we do this? Would this be a Wiki page that just has links to the best tutorials/threads? Does someone have a better implementation suggestion?

Edit: A page has been set up for this until we decide to move it somewhere else:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Troubleshooting

[PriceChild]

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CommonQuestions

[aysiu]

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CommonQuestions
I don't really think that's the same thing.

Those questions are just about getting to know Ubuntu in general.

That isn't really a troubleshooting FAQ ("My X is broken"; "How do I get the proper screen resolution?"; "How do I have two applications play sound at the same time?").

[Lucifiel]

I voted for option two. This is a good idea, Aiysu. :)

A searchable articles database would allow many newbies to get past their "first truama". There's nothing like the shock of being thrust into busybox when your Xorg breaks. Not to mention there're many different causes of why ____ can break and such articles would be a real lifesaver.

There've been too many times I was stuck and resulted to applying any method I could think of, whether they had any relevance did not matter anymore. Then, I'd find out that I could've solved all that by entering just one line of code.

As always, your ideas and thoughts are sound, making you a really reliable man. :D (Your wife must be proud!)

[koenn]

This ?
http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Dapper

[Lucifiel]

This ?
http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Dapper

I think Aiysu was thinking of something far more complete. Just some FAQs aren't enough 'cos there're many ways by which an application or even part of Xorg can break.

A wiki sounds nice but it'd be rather hard to update when dealing with massive number of articles. A cms or something similar would be better 'cos then, it'd be easier to publish and control the access of various articles.

[bukwirm]

A troubleshooting FAQ is probably a good idea.
It should also include resources that describe things like how to find additional help or how to find the answer yourself, though.

[aysiu]

Even though the line can be blurry sometimes, I think there is a difference between a collection of HowTos and a collection of troubleshooting guides.

A HowTo usually tells you how to do something positive. A troubleshooting guide usually tells you how to fix things when something isn't working.

Of course, some of our HowTos on these forums are also troubleshooting guides, but the point is that there isn't a "one-stop shopping" page for solving problems. The problem-solving pages are all over the place, and they're mixed in with the "Do something else cool?" tutorials.

[John.Michael.Kane]

Usually when I see threads titled something like A CS major's experience of 3 months (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=451786), I cringe--knowing what "original" suggestions lie within.

The OP, however, brings up a good point: This isn't something we need to wait on Ubuntu for. We as a community can do this.

So two questions:

1. Should we do this? Is this necessary? Or we should we rely on Google and forum searches to find the answers to problems?

2. How should we do this? Would this be a Wiki page that just has links to the best tutorials/threads? Does someone have a better implementation suggestion?

Who is we going to build it? You?

You say that as a community it can be done. I don't buy that. The fact is you will have to find people willing to catalog these answers verify they work, and be willing to write them to the doc/faq your talking about.

Right now you telling me that these same individuals screaming theres no answers or why do i have to search xyz amount of threads, are going to help build this troubleshooting FAQ / database.

Please why would they help with this when they don't or wont search for answers which 95% of the time can fix the issue they have now.

Going this route you will end up with a few select members doing all the work.

In the end all your doing is spoon feeding answers to users who don't want search or ask questions.

[aysiu]

Who is we going to build it? You?

You say that as a community it can be done. I don't buy that. The fact is you will have to find people willing to catalog these answers verify they work, and be willing to write them to the doc/faq your talking about.

Right now you telling me that these same individuals screaming theres no answers or why do i have to search xyz amount of threads, are going to help build this troubleshooting FAQ / database.

Please why would they help with this when they don't or wont search for answers which 95% of the time can fix the issue they have now. No, I don't think the people who don't know how to troubleshoot their own problems are the same ones who'd be building the database. I think it'd be people like me (God, I hope it wouldn't be me alone)--individuals who know a little bit about troubleshooting and finding good troubleshooting guides--collecting resources and putting them all in one place.



Going this route you will end up with a few select members doing all the work.

In the end all your doing is spoon feeding answers to users who don't want search or ask questions.
So I guess you're going to vote for I'm against this. People should learn to search for answers?

I don't see how having a bunch of troubleshooting guides (or links to the best ones) all in one place is "spoonfeeding" people any more than having the http://www.ubuntuguide.org put a bunch of helpful commands all in one place is "spoonfeeding" people.

Can you elaborate on that?

[Lucifiel]

Don't worry, Aiysu! I'm sure many will have something to contribute. ;)

As they say, a great nation was never built in a day. :D

[aysiu]

Don't worry, Aiysu! I'm sure many will have something to contribute. ;)

As they say, a great nation was never built in a day. :D
Thanks for the reassurance.

Hell, it could even start with only two links to troubleshooting tutorials. Two would soon become four, etc.

I know how to set up a Wiki page, but if we went with a content management system, who would set that up, and who would host it?

[Lucifiel]

Thanks for the reassurance.

Hell, it could even start with only two links to troubleshooting tutorials. Two would soon become four, etc.

I know how to set up a Wiki page, but if we went with a content management system, who would set that up, and who would host it?

No problem! :D

Hmmm... ask around! I'm sure someone here will know something about setting up cmses. Trust me, with over 20k users, you can't go wrong!

There's something actually simple like joomla or drupal and likely many other cmses. For the very simple types, you could even run it off your computer for testing purposes! It's more of like clicking around and making sure you make timely backups and taking care in what type of scripts to install.

As for hosting, hmmm... the best thing is throw some donations + funds together and get someone to buy a server?

Edit: Or if we're lucky, someone here might even donate a hosting account. We'll never know!

[Ozeuss]

Thanks for the reassurance.

Hell, it could even start with only two links to troubleshooting tutorials. Two would soon become four, etc.

I know how to set up a Wiki page, but if we went with a content management system, who would set that up, and who would host it?

I think it's a great idea Aysiu. alot of posts that i see have simple answers, or are even duplicates for question asked yesterday. many ones lack basic specific information in order to troubleshoot the problem (i.e, like output of fstab, or source.list, posting specs).
I think it should start as a couple of wiki pages first, and see where it goes from there.
about CMS- drupal might do that job, and not to difficult to set. i think when time comes, maybe it could be hosted on ubuntu servers? (oh, BTW, the ubuntu main website uses drupal).

[John.Michael.Kane]

No, I don't think the people who don't know how to troubleshoot their own problems are the same ones who'd be building the database. I think it'd be people like me (God, I hope it wouldn't be me alone)--individuals who know a little bit about troubleshooting and finding good troubleshooting guides--collecting resources and putting them all in one place.


So I guess you're going to vote for I'm against this. People should learn to search for answers?

I don't see how having a bunch of troubleshooting guides (or links to the best ones) all in one place is "spoonfeeding" people any more than having the http://www.ubuntuguide.org put a bunch of helpful commands all in one place is "spoonfeeding" people.

Can you elaborate on that?

That guide does spoon feeding as well. with no need to learn what the commands do.

What your suggesting is that all the fixes or commands to help users out their mistakes or problems. be placed in section for them to just copy paste where is the learning in this?

As far as I'm concerned your proposal is not complete. If this faq/doc is being done just so that you don't ask the same question over again then it's a waste.

If it's done with out explaining what every fix, and every command does then again it's a waste.

You can post commands here, and not explain what they do,and users the paste them not thinking oh will this erase my home folder, and all my movies.

There has to be a reason for this doc, and it can't be only based on some user saying theres not enough information or the information is not understandable by new users.

[aysiu]

Well, instead of naysaying what you think I'm proposing, why don't you propose a way in which it could be implemented well?

No, it doesn't have to be a bunch of commands with no explanation.

In fact, it doesn't even have to have commands at all. It could just be links to the best guides on troubleshooting that problem. Part of the problem with searching for solutions isn't performing the search but filtering out the search--trying to figure out what is valid advice and what is not valid advice, what's the most efficient or safest way to fix a problem as opposed to some sloppy workaround.

It could simply be a collection of links to fix-it tutorials that do have explanations and not just "spoonfeeding" as you call it.

Or, if the project gets really ambitious, it could be actual fix-it tutorials with explanations.

Why do you already assume outright that it would just be copy and paste commands with no explanations?

[Eddie Wilson]

Who is we going to build it? You?

You say that as a community it can be done. I don't buy that. The fact is you will have to find people willing to catalog these answers verify they work, and be willing to write them to the doc/faq your talking about.

Right now you telling me that these same individuals screaming theres no answers or why do i have to search xyz amount of threads, are going to help build this troubleshooting FAQ / database.

Please why would they help with this when they don't or wont search for answers which 95% of the time can fix the issue they have now.

Going this route you will end up with a few select members doing all the work.

In the end all your doing is spoon feeding answers to users who don't want search or ask questions.

What have you got against helping new users? Or do you help them at all? Sure you can search the forums and can wade through 20 or more answers that don't help until you find the right one. You don't have to help if you don't to but don't give other people a hard time when all they want to do is make the community better.

[Lucifiel]

Hmm... I don't think having guides and tutorials serve as spoonfeeding. In any case, Linux is a pretty complex machine and such guides and tutorials would clear things up and even enlighten the user.

It ain't fair to dump the user without any warning into a pit, with three ropes she could use but one of which leads to a 500 feet drop and another to a dungeon of scorpions and anacondas. Yep, troubleshooting can be that painful and can lead to said user dumping the o/s after the last 20 "solutions" have destroyed component after component of Ubuntu.

[Iarwain ben-adar]

I like the idea, and would contribute to it (as long as my real life doesn't get into danger :D)

BUT: if noobs don't bother searching now, why would they then? Spoonfeeding is not a correct option, but if you just broke your X, and you need it working in 10 minutes, i too would just want a solution.

An idea:
You know the troubleshooting that Windows does?
"What doesn't work?" => tick box
"This could have several reasons, what did you recently do?" => tick box
etc etc.

Just an idea, because i know people don't like searching :D


Iarwain

[bapoumba]

Part of the problem with searching for solutions isn't performing the search but filtering out the search--trying to figure out what is valid advice and what is not valid advice, what's the most efficient or safest way to fix a problem as opposed to some sloppy workaround.

I think that is the key idea here.

- will people seeking for help perform a search on an external resource ?
- is this also intended towards people who actually help allowing them to link to reliable advices ?

I have not voted yet. I'm in favor of the rationale, and also considering that fixes have sometimes to be adapted to a particular situation.

[aysiu]

Well, Iarwain, you bring up a good point.

First of all, I have to say I've always hated the Windows troubleshooting wizard, since it's never solved a single one of my problems--just led me through a bunch of questions "Is it this?" "Is it this?" and ultimately told me that it can't find a solution.

That said, it's true that people who don't bother searching in the first place might not bother searching to find a troubleshooting document, but a troubleshooting page has several distinct advantages over the current "fend for yourself with a Google search" approach:

1. It's easier to link to for those trying to help. If the regular "help the newcomers" people know there's a troubleshooting FAQ, they know exactly where to go to get the newcomer help without doing a search themselves or asking the newcomer to do a search.

2. It filters out crap instructions and sends people directly to the best solution (as decided by the people maintaining the FAQ).

3. Once someone is aware there is an FAQ for troubleshooting (maybe she was referred to it for the first problem), she can go back to it for a second or third problem.

4. I've always found searching within a page a lot easier than searching the global internet or even the forums. Same deal as searching Synaptic for software as opposed to the global internet.

[Bachstelze]

I voyed "I'm for it but I won't contribute". For it because having yet another source of info can't hurt but wouldn't contribute because I don't think it's realy necessary

[Iarwain ben-adar]

Well,
the Windows troubleshooter never had an answer for me aswell,
but we are open-sourcers ;)

If the source of the problem is some-what more narrowed down the user could be pointed to some 'possible' solutions. The problem herein lies in the fact that the user should have some knowledge about what he has done..
I know (from own experience) that that could be a little tricky.

Oh well,
if i can help in any ways possible, i'm in :D


Iarwain

[John.Michael.Kane]

Well, instead of naysaying what you think I'm proposing, why don't you propose a way in which it could be implemented well?

I clearly give you a starting point. Make the info in depth even if you feel theres no need for it.


No, it doesn't have to be a bunch of commands with no explanation.
Copy paste is all most new ubuntu/linux users make it seem they want. If you provide the info of what they are doing this may help them better understand linux as a whole.




In fact, it doesn't even have to have commands at all. It could just be links to the best guides on troubleshooting that problem. Part of the problem with searching for solutions isn't performing the search but filtering out the search--trying to figure out what is valid advice and what is not valid advice, what's the most efficient or safest way to fix a problem as opposed to some sloppy workaround.

Posting links to other peoples site, and not verifying the info works will not fly.

So who will test the method in these links to make sure the info is sound?

Almost every fix is going to be a workaround or hack unless its fixed from the start by the ones who wrote it.


It could simply be a collection of links to fix-it tutorials that do have explanations and not just "spoonfeeding" as you call it.

Then you would have to find tutorials that have explanations. most of them just explain what the guide does.


Or, if the project gets really ambitious, it could be actual fix-it tutorials with explanations.
So only explain if theres a need?
Otherwise copy paste this and be on your way.

Again not the right way to go about what your planing.


Why do you already assume outright that it would just be copy and paste commands with no explanations?
I have never seen anyone ask what xyz command does. For the most part someone post saying this is what works. If it does the person is never seen again till next problem.

[aysiu]

I clearly give you a starting point. Make the info in depth even if you feel theres no need for it. And talk is cheap. Why don't we get started, and if you feel the information is insufficient, you can provide some further explanations? It's easy to be critical.


Posting links to other peoples site, and not verifying the info works will not fly. And the current system is any different how? That's what people do now. If someone asks a question, someone just posts a link to a fix-it or provides a fix-it herself. Or the person with the question searches for the answer herself. In all those scenarios, no one is "verifying the info works." And whose approval in terms of verification would you trust? You don't seem to trust mine or anyone else's.


So who will test the method in these links to make sure the info is sound? People who've experienced the problem themselves.


Almost every fix is going to be a workaround or hack unless its fixed from the start by the ones who wrote it. That's not true at all. I'll give you an example. Let's say someone has Kubuntu "take over" the usplash and is upset about this. A workaround or hack would be to just remove usplash altogether. That does, in fact, get rid of Kubuntu "taking over," but it doesn't restore the Ubuntu usplash.

I've also seen scenarios in which someone cannot execute a certain administrative graphical application with gksudo but can with sudo and so continues to use sudo, which appears to "work," but may be causing further permissions damage. The proper fix is to chown the home directory back to the user and stop using sudo with graphical applications.


Then you would have to find tutorials that have explanations. most of them just explain what the guide does. Once again--how is it then any better not to have a troubleshooting FAQ? All you're saying is that it's possible the only advantage the FAQ guide would have over the current situation (not enough explanation on some topics) is that the fixes will all be in one place, and I'm saying, "Yes, even if that's the only advantage, that's a great advantage." If people want to improve the existing tutorials to include more explanation, more power to them. That's a different issue entirely.

[aysiu]

Well, I'm going to start getting to work on this.

SD-Plissken, your disapproval and cautionary warnings are duly noted.

Arguing isn't going to get it done, though. Getting it done is going to get it done.

I've set up a Wiki page for it:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Troubleshooting

Only a few links are on there so far, but people can edit and add to it as they see fit. If there's a dispute about which is the "best" fix for a problem, we can discuss here the merits of the fixes.

I'll add more to it (it's a little bare now) over the next week or so.

[Herman]

I'm on your side aysiu, I think it's a great idea and should have been done ages ago. It only needs someone like you to get it started and co-ordinate it a little bit.
I think it would be great if there was a series of categories suggested and one volunteer chosen per topic in charge of maintaining their own subject.
That person could scan the forums regularly and also be informed by other users about any new problems or new ideas for solving old problems, and keep it up to date when software changes.

You are welcome to add a link to my Super Grub Disk Common Booting Errors and Some Possible Cures (http://users.bigpond.net.au/hermanzone/SuperGrubDiskPage.html#Common_Booting_Errors_and_S ome_Possible), if you think it fits the style of thing you decide to use. I don't know if everyone knows where to find it. I think it would be great if someone else could make similar pages on their own chosen subjects and they could all be found easily.
Is that the type of thing you mean?

Great idea, aysiu,
Regards, Herman :D

[Lucifiel]

Another link here:

http://www.sysresccd.org/

And also:

http://gparted.sourceforge.net/

Both of these are invaluable tools.

[Erik Trybom]

This is an excellent idea. A troubleshooting FAQ complements the forum in a nice way.

The reason for this is that forums really aren't that great for info searching. Most forums have a mediocre search function. You often get hundreds of results, and it's hard to filter out the ones that apply to your specific problem. Sometimes you don't know the correct terms, or the most used ones (which might not even be the same). If you try to narrow down the search by including more terms you might pick the wrong ones. It is also hard to see which solution is valid (this guide was made for Edgy but I'm on Feisty, will it still work?).

Therefore I think a FAQ like this should be systematic. It should state, for every article::

- What problem it solves.
- Which Ubuntu versions it applies to.
- What hardware it applies to (if relevant).
- What category it belongs in (so it's easy to find).

I'm sure there's something I've forgotten, but that's a start. It's important that if we make a FAQ we have to make it good enough to be THE starting point for troubleshooting Ubuntu. Otherwise it will just add to the pile of disordered information that's already around, on wikis and forums and various home pages.

[aysiu]

I like your idea, Erik.

If you have ways to improve the current Wiki page, go ahead and edit it. If you need help editing (you've never used a Wiki before), I can help with the little I do know (I'm not Wiki expert).

What I've already set up is not set in stone. I just want to make sure the ball gets rolling. If you can organize it better or implement it better, go for it.

And if someone does want to set up a CMS and host it, we can discuss moving the Wiki entries over to something like that.

[Lucifiel]

There!

I've just contributed some information about partitions. :)

[aysiu]

Thanks, Lucifiel.

I'll keep updating it as I find problems and solutions Others, please join in!

[lyceum]

This is a great idea. It would take some work, but be worth it.

[Iarwain ben-adar]

Initial Setup

Fixes for common booting errors

This link should also be pointed to: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/grub-error-guide.xml


4. Software Issues:

Q: Help, my .exe doesn't work here!
A: Well, you don't run Windows anymore, it's Linux now. That doesn't mean you can't get your program working,
you can try in wine (insert link to wine installation/using guide).

Q: Help, i downloaded a tar.gz and don't know what to do with it!
A: First off all, make sure you have build-essential installed ('sudo aptitude install build-essential' + graphical way?)
, untar the file (clicking on it, and saying where to unpack), open up your favorite terminal, cd to the right dir (using 'cd folder_name'), then type these

./configure
make
sudo make install (not 100% sure about the 'sudo make install' part)

If you miss certain libraries, an error will be printed and saying what libraries you need.
To find the missing libraries, 'apt-cache search library_name'

Don't know what other stuff to do atm (need to go to bed :D)


Iarwain

[aysiu]

By the way, I'm focusing most of my energy right now on finding good links. If people think the organization stinks or could use more refiniing, by all means refine away!

[Iarwain ben-adar]

A quick note on the links,
Gentoo (-users, -forums) have great knowledge about general Linux stuff. Their wiki is also very good documented.
Why not scour some wiki's from other distro's? To pick up ideas, information, links, etc.


Iarwain

[ghandi69_]

Could I start one that I used to get confused with early on, and that is... a "my package not found" error. This is pretty simple, but I would just explain to them the purpose of the etc/apt/sources.list file, and hopefully help them figure out why they would need to add more sources to that list in order to get certain packages.

[Iarwain ben-adar]

I think it is best to add your info in a post here on the thread. So the wiki stays clean =)


Iarwain

[Flump5000]

why not make one? people say theres no reason to, but why not. all it does is make it easier, especially for new people.

[Lucifiel]

I've been making some contributions but how about everyone else?

C'mon and help in, folks! :D

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Troubleshooting

[aysiu]

I've been adding a little bit here and there as I've been seeing problems solved here on the forums.

[Lucifiel]

Aiysu, are there any guidelines for adding information to the wiki? ^^;;

Hopefully, i haven't made a mess of the wiki. =P

[aysiu]

Aiysu, are there any guidelines for adding information to the wiki? ^^;;

Hopefully, i haven't made a mess of the wiki. =P
I don't know if there are...

[Lucifiel]

I actually think it would be useful to establish some rules/guidelines for the Wiki to achieve consistenncy in terms of format and information. Perhaps not now but definitely, sooner or later as correcting pages of information would spell a rather unapealling taskl.

Sorry if my speliing is off.. ugh, why did i eat all that cheese? I'm going off to lie down now.

[PartisanEntity]

I believe you will be reinventing the wheel. What's wrong with the forum? It's a searchable database of thousands of articles and questions.

[aysiu]

I believe you will be reinventing the wheel. What's wrong with the forum? It's a searchable database of thousands of articles and questions.
And I actually had to search it many times and weed through a lot of crap dead-end threads in order to find a lot of answers that are now centralized on that Wiki page.

It's not reinventing the wheel. Searching through threads takes a long time, and a lot of threads where people have experienced the same problem as you do not necessarily have a working solution.

[PartisanEntity]

And I actually had to search it many times and weed through a lot of crap dead-end threads in order to find a lot of answers that are now centralized on that Wiki page.

It's not reinventing the wheel. Searching through threads takes a long time, and a lot of threads where people have experienced the same problem as you do not necessarily have a working solution.

I had a look at the Wiki and perhaps you are right, it does seem useful to have troubleshooting advice on one convenient page. I believe it would also be a good idea to create a stand alone version that could perhaps one day ship with an Ubuntu release and be available for new users immediately and in case they are having issues with their internet connection.

[salsafyren]

This is a great idea.

Don't let the naysayers stop you.

[manit40]

i think its a grt idea y the hell should people struggle like crap and spend hours of searching a bout all good in my books esp 4 the noo bees:p

[Lucifiel]

What? This cannot be. I was gone from using Ubuntu for almost 2 months and so far, few have shown interest in updating the guide? Good lords!

[happy-and-lost]

Yes, but it would need to be kept more up-to-date and more standardised than the exsting Ubuntu Wiki.

[walmartshopper67]

I voted option 1 - great idea, I'd love to help. Definitely needed to bring Ubuntu to the next level.

[confused57]

aysiu, I think it's a great idea...anytime I try out a new distro, I make sure I know where to find the documentation & best forum pertaining to the distro, and a FAQ is usually quite helpful.

I think there should be a list started of the most common problems & questions that users have...in fact, it might be a good idea to start a new poll(or just a thread) asking what might need to be included in the "Beginner" section. Once a definitive list is started, there would be a base of issues that could be addressed by others more experienced with a particular question/problem that might be able to provide a solution.

My thinking(ouch, my head hurts) is that if there is a concrete list of common problems started, there is a good chance there is someone who has experienced the problem and knows a viable solution.

I haven't frequented the "Cafe" much lately, thus this is the first I've seen of this idea. I believe it would get better exposure & feedback in another section of the forum.

[Crashmaxx]

I don't think there is anything wrong with what we have now except that the current wiki doesn't get updated enough nor is it comprehensive enough. I know we had some people volunteering time here and I think we should encourage everyone to add to the wiki when they find a solution for any problem and update the pages they find that are out of date.

I don't think the wiki should be full of links to threads either, someone needs to take the time to take that info and put it on the appropriate wiki page formatted nicely and cited to the thread as to verify the source.

The most simple way I can put it is, look at Gentoo's wiki, and that is what we need Ubuntu's wiki to be a lot more like.

[macogw]

You know the troubleshooting thing on Windows where it asks to to try something then asks what changed or if it's fixed, then gives another suggestion? What if there was a page where you pick the basic problem, then it asks the usual troubleshooting questions we would ask? It could ask for lspci, then there's gotta be a way that it could be parsed so that it would suggest "install fglrx" or "install bcm43xx-fwcutter" or whatever.