Hi, Justin B Rye <[email protected]> wrote: > Holger Wansing wrote: > > 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.
Yes, that was exactly what I wanted to say when I wrote that sentence: that there is a new binary named apt, introduced with Jessie, which has said advantages. And that's why I like the "got" :-) > [...] > >> @@ -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. Ok, so we stay with learn. > [...] > >> +<!-- 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.) I have heard of the httpredir thing as a "service" many times, that's why I proposed it. > >> + 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.) Ok. Cheers Holger -- ============================================================ Created with Sylpheed 3.5.0 under D E B I A N L I N U X 8 . 0 " J E S S I E " . Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/ ============================================================
