>
> Jean-Philippe,
>
> I know your intentions are good, but this irritates me.
oh you shouldn't, really it's not enough important to be irritated I think.
Only a small proposal and an idea I prefer sharing instead of keeping for me.
> We can't
> spell out every possible combination of errors someone makes.
Right.
> It
> doesn't say extract the tarball to some arbitrary location that requires
> a special switch.
What switch? I've never talked about any switches. I only see users who, when
the book said they can unpack anywhere, they unpack in $LFS directly and have
issues.
> It says "extract the package to be built" and implies
> don't use any special switches.
Don't understand, I didn't introduce switch notion. Only a common errer about
the location where sources are unpacked and the relationship between the
unpacked source location and patches location. It means: 1. they musn't unpack
in $LFS and $LFS/tools. 2. They must unpack in the same directory as patches as
otherwise, they don't understand (or don't see) the ../ before name of any
patch and don't understand why patch is not discovered (once they cd in source).
> If the user makes a decision to use
> something different, then it's up to them to figure out the problem.
Of course.
> If there is a problem in going from English to French, feel free to
> modify the words in the French version.
I hope we talk about the same problem. But for this peecise situation, not
ambigueus result possible due to translation. So nothing to seee with
French-English for this precise case.
Anyway no problem for me, it was only a suggestion inspired by my blfs
translation now. If useless or not understandable, no problem I won't be
disappointed or irritated: computer is my entertainment... :)
> -- Bruce
-
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL
Vice-Président de l'association traduc.org
Coordinateur du projet Linux From Scratch
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
