On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:24:50PM +0000, akhiezer wrote: > > To reiterate in summary, addressing much of your words: > -- > * the central point is about managing the book information, incl > release engineering. >
At the moment, this is a proposed change. If my fellow editors agree, something based on it will go into the development book. If there are then problems, it can be altered or reverted. > * it's better to do the phase-out as the two-stage process than the > one-stage; that includes educational value. Says you. > -- > It seems that maybe you are a bit too close to the fine-details of the > subject matter to see the wider-picture trees. > That I will accept - those of us who are editing the book have visions of where certain things can be improved. > > > > > > > The legacy page should at this time include all of the fonts/&c that > > > you've removed from elsewhere. > > > > > > > On this, I disagree strongly. We've carried multiple versions of > > some of the old fonts (bitmap, Type1, ttf) for too long. Meanwhile > > current distros use TTF/OTF and even our own xterm page is already > > set to do that. > > > > BLFS, like LFS, is about learning AND about building leading-edge > > software. > > > > > And only after a few more book releases, then remove some/all of the > > > items from the book > > > > > > That's a standard way of 'putting out to pasture' - phasing out - such > > > materials: don't just - for such a case - do the reorganise and remove > > > in same step. > > > > > > > IFF somebody wants them, I provided links to the relevant page in > > the two 7.10 books. But nobody really documented what those bitmap > > fonts were good for. Initially they were part of monolithic X. > > So I have no idea *why* anybody might want them. Do you have a > > use-case ? > > > > > It's ok though to prioritise at this time the focus on the > > > libXfont/bdftopcf/font-adobe-100dpi . > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > +<sect1 id="xorg7-legacy" xreflabel="Xorg Legacy"> > > > > + <?dbhtml filename="x7legacy.html"?> > > > > + > > > > + <sect1info> > > > > + <othername>$LastChangedBy: dibbler $</othername> > > > > + <date>$Date: 2038-01-19 03:14:07 +0000 (Tue, 19 Jan 2038) $</date> > > > > + </sect1info> > > > > + > > > > + <title>Xorg Legacy</title> > > > > + > > > > + <indexterm zone="xorg7-legacy"> > > > > + <primary sortas="a-xorg7-legacy">Xorg Legacy</primary> > > > > + </indexterm> > > > > + > > > > + <sect2 role="package"> > > > > + <title>Introduction to Xorg Legacy</title> > > > > + > > > > + <para><application>Xorg</application> originally provided bitmap > > > > fonts, > > > > > > > > > 'originally' implies that it now doesn't: does it still; if so then > > > reword. > > > > > I can change originally to 'at first only'. > > > The 'at first only' is better. > > > > Does that help you ? > > > ("Now, now"). It helps the book and readers of the book. > > So far, _you_ are the only person complaining about the wording, so I was asking if it helped you. > > > > > > > + and a tool (<command>bdftopcf</command>) to assist in their > > > > installation. > > > > + With the introduction of > > > > <application>xorg-server-1.19.0</application> > > > > + and <application>libXfont2</application>, many people will not > > > > need them. > > > > + There are still a few old packages which might require, or benefit > > > > from, > > > > + these deprecated fonts and so the following packages are shown > > > > here.</para> > > > > > > > > > Those last two sentences - and in partic the last - are a bit too vague > > > and ~hand-waving; and leave readers a bit too much in the dark. > > > > > > > Beyond the two packages from the book which I mention below, I have > > no idea what strange desktop packages might still need bitmap fonts. > > Possibly, somebody wrote an application years ago, abandonned it, and > > somebody else is still using it. In an infinite universe, anything > > is possible. > > > > I know of the two packages in the book, I also recall that when I > > first started looking at console fonts (probably in 2006 or 2007) I > > initially started from a bdf source file, but I do not recall > > whether it actually used bdftopcf, only that at the time somebody > > used my variant to create a bitmapped psf and raised a bug. Also, > > the default Makefile of Terminus uses bdftopcf to create bitmap > > fonts and some format for (I think) a BSD. > > > > > At least, for those packages (if any) that are in BLFS and that > > > are _known_ or _thought_ to still require the now-legacy materials, > > > they should be listed and linked-to explicitly: if there are only a > > > few such packages (e.g. tigervnc &c) then it's not a hassle to list; > > > if the list were not short, then it'd call into question doing the > > > 'legacy' stuff yet. > > > > > They are linked *from* (tigervnc, xscreensaver). As in the rest of > > the book, we expect you to know what you want to build, and then > > determin e the depen den cies and come up with a build order. So > > for everything else people who do that can build Xorg without t he > > Xorg Legacy packages. > > > > + > > > > + <note> > > > > + <para> > > > > + The font-adobe-100dpi package installs 100 dots per inch > > > > versions of > > > > + Courier, Helvetica, New Century Schoolbook and Times fonts. In > > > > previous > > > > + versions of BLFS a lot more fonts were installed, and also 75 > > > > dots per > > > > > > > > > s/and also/including/ > > > > > > or maybe even (less good) > > > > > > s/and also/plus/ > > > > > > - but _NOT_ 'and also'; red pen. > > > > > > > Sorry, if you apply a red pen I'm inclined to screw up the paper and > > put it in the bin ;-) > > > Still wrong, though. > > (But do go ahead and screw/toss your materials if you prefer.) > I didn't say I was going to toss out what I'd prepared - only the piece of paper where you thought you had the right to mark the grammar. > > > In the country where I live, this is perfectly > > acceptable in most written English > > > It's still known-bad use of English. > Ooh. I will now assert that English is a *living* language, and asserting that there is one good form for all situations (and therefore others can be known-bad) is false. > > > (and as a nation we now denigrate > > experts). > > > ( - 'meeja'-speak. No you don't.) > As a nation, we do. I might not like that, but the voters have spoken. > > > > > I can change it to 'installed, also'. > > > That'd be even worse use of English. > > The 'including' is better sense, given what the two sentences of the > para are saying. > > > > > > + inch versions. > > > > + </para> > > > > + > > > > + <para revision="sysv"> > > > > + Please consult the BLFS-7.10 book at <ulink > > > > + > > > > url="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/7.10/x/x7font.html"/> > > > > + if you wish to install any of those other fonts. > > > > > > > > > Still too vague: you're leaving readers to hunt'n'peck, while you > > > know what they're likely to be looking for. > > > > No, I *don't* know why anybody would want to use any of the other > > bitmap fonts. > > > > > Again: for packages in > > > BLFS that are known/thought to still require the legacy materials, > > > state the details explicitly. As noted, such materials should anyhow > > > be listed in legacy page. > > > > > > > Again, I disagree strongly. The adobe fonts (which I listed on the > > page) seem to be all that is necessary. If you read a non-latin > > writing system then they might be inadequate - I would not know, and > > I assume that people building a BLFS desktop for such users will be > > using TTF or OTF fonts. > > > > > > > > > + </para> > > > > + > > > > + <para revision="systemd"> > > > > + Please consult the BLFS-7.10 systemd book at <ulink > > > > + > > > > url="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/7.10-systemd/x/x7font.html"/> > > > > + if you wish to install any of those other fonts. > > > > + </para> > > > > + </note> > > > > + > > > > > > > > > Ditto. > > > > > Only one of those paragraphs will apply in a particular book, so > > obviously your comment has to apply to both of them. > > > - just some extra clarification & aide-memoire place-marker, erring > on the safe side: e.g. it's presumably also "obvious" to you that if > you remove a font entry from one list, then you'd remove it from the > essentially same-list/same-context elsewhere; but not everyone would > always _do_ such an "obvious" thing; and an aide-memoire place-marker > clarificatory check-item can help avoid such omissions. Of course. And unlike you, I make a lot of mistakes - even while developing the book. I am once again doubtful about using my time to reply to you. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page