Holger Wansing wrote: > Beatrice Torracca <[email protected]> wrote: >> Since Holger is doing such an extensive great job in >> reorganizing/updating the FAQ I thought this might be a good moment to >> re-read the FAQs as a "low-level" reviewer. The changes I propose are >> mostly minor typos and such. > > Great. You found a lot of typos / potential for improvement. > [...] > > Some comments on your patch: > >> <p>Starting with Debian Jessie, some frequently used >> -<prgn/apt-get/ and <prgn/apt-cache/ commands got an equivalent via >> +<prgn/apt-get/ and <prgn/apt-cache/ commands have an equivalent via > > I don't see the improvement here, so omitting this.
It's a non-native-speakerism. The current FAQ says that the commands "got" (="did acquire") an equivalent. What it's trying to say is that the commands "have" (="do possess") an equivalent. [...] >> @@ -321,8 +321,8 @@ >> status symbol (explained in the header), the package name, the version >> which is <em>installed</em>, and a brief description. >> >> -<p>To learn the status of packages whose names match the string any >> -pattern beginning with "foo" by executing the command: >> +<p>To learn the status of packages whose names match any >> +pattern beginning with "foo", run the command: > > Maybe we should change "learn" into something like "query" here? > Justin? "Query" would work, but "learn" has the advantage of being simpler than most of the alternatives, which is helpful here. [...] >> +<!-- info on httpredir mostly from http://httpredir.debian.org/ --> >> +<p>Or you can use the redirector httpredir.debian.org which aims to > > Or you can use the redirector service httpredir.debian.org ? > (add "service" ) (Those both sound okay, and I don't know which is more accurate.) >> + solve the problem of choosing a Debian mirror. It uses the geographic >> + location of the user and other information to choose the best mirror >> + that can serve the files. To take advantage of it use a source like >> + this one: >> + >> +<example>http://httpredir.debian.org/debian stable main contrib >> non-free</example> > > Maybe we should not include "non-free" in such examples? > Users may copy them directly to their sources.list and have non-free > without knowing of the exact details regarding non-free. > > There is another code example in this chapter, which also includes > non-free. I would remove it there too. (I had a similar thought but was too lazy to check other examples.) -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
