Qrux wrote: >> 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.
But what you are asking for is more instructions, not more clarity. If we add the unpack instructions for the first 10 packages, someone will complain when they get to package 11. Repetition is not the same as clarity. Section vi. "It is also expected that you have a reasonable knowledge of using and installing Linux software.: Section 3.1. "Downloaded packages and patches will need to be stored somewhere that is conveniently available throughout the entire build. A working directory is also required to unpack the sources and build them. $LFS/sources can be used both as the place to store the tarballs and patches and as a working directory." Section 5.3. General Compilation Instructions "For each package: Using the tar program, extract the package to be built. In Chapter 5, ensure you are the lfs user when extracting the package. Change to the directory created when the package was extracted." How do we clarify that? Repeat it for every package? If there is something unclear, I'll change it, but I can't read it for the users. We did add to 5.4: "Go back and re-read the notes in the previous section. Understanding the notes labeled important will save you a lot of problems later." Note that we did add a similar note to 5.5. GCC-4.7.0 - Pass 1. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
