On May 4, 2012, at 10:15 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Qrux wrote:
>
>> LFS devs, writers, and editors, please try to understand that the LFS can
>> read like a list of GPS coordinates given at 1mm spacings without altitude
>> and annotations. If I follow it *exactly*, and assume no errors in the
>> readings or the map, and I make the same set of assumptions as you, then I'll
>> get there. But, if I miss by just a tiny bit, instead of walking along a
>> ridge, I fall off the cliff. Having been around a bit to see users struggle
>> and struggle and struggle with the "implied" directions in Chapter 5 about
>> unpacking stuff, (esp. when the rest of time you're repeating to people to
>> follow the book VERBATIM), it seems that there could be more warning there.
>
> Computers are like that. Get one bit wrong and the whole thing fails.
>
> What more do you want? 5.3 gives explicit instructions. 5.4 is binutils and
> the very first thing is a note to go back and ensure you understand 5.3.
>
> What we are not going to do is put on every page:
>
> tar -xf package.tar.xz
> cd package
> .....
> cd ..
> rm -rf package package-build
Would it be hard to put an "unpack_warning" entity before each of the "Phase 1"
builds (all 2 or 3), or even the "Phase 2" builds (those same 2 or 3)?
It's about signposts. You know. Like the ones with the squiggly road to
indicate curves ahead. Yes, speed limits, if rigorous observed will work most
of time (though not always, like when HWY 17 was first built, with incorrectly
counter-banked turns). So, a bit more information, with a warning sign, can
help, when there's a confusing situation.
I didn't say the instructions were wrong. I said signposts--or better
writing--could be used. Writing means many things. In this case, you seem to
be focusing on the words themselves. But what about structure? A little
repetition goes a long way.
> The users need to learn to think about what needs to be done, not just
> copy/paste without understanding.
As a proxy example of ambiguity, do you not see the...confusion...some might
experience when in your previous email, you said:
> If you follow the instructions literally, they work. Making inferences and
> adding things not in the book is where users run into problems.
"Think!" "Don't infer!"
I'm saying it could use more clarity. You're saying that you're not
technically wrong. Those two can exist at the same time.
Q
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
