Mark Hymers markh at
Thu Oct 25 13:42:35 PDT 2001

On Wed, 24, Oct, 2001 at 09:29:23PM +0200, Henning Rohde spoke thus..
> >> Known errors:
> >> "document type does not allow element "sect3" here"
> >> occurs after using an orderedlist in both fw-writing.xml and
> >> fw-appendix.xml for structuring the sub-chapters.
> >> 
> > I got it to build by removing the itemized list structure.  
> > 
> Yes, I know, but I want to keep using the <orderedlist>, at any costs 
> because I'd like to be able to refer to the definitions by (B)!
> Is it impossible to include those sub-section into an ordered list, or is 
> it some bug in the current implementation of docbook?
> Both  <orderedlist> and <itemizedlist> do not list a inclusion to be a 
> 'DO_NOT', would you do me the please and do further researches on this, I'm 
> still not that foolish to dare to mail any docbook-developers.
I'll try and find out.  I've left the list in as it generates correctly
despite the warning... That's weird.  As I say I'll try and investigate
the changes.

Actually - on second thoughts, why don't we just make the titles 
A. Personal Firewall etc and remove the <orderedlist> tags.  Wouldn't it
have the same effect?

OK - Here is a list of the changes I've made:
1) I've modified the <para></para> tags and line lengths as I mentioned
2) I've added NOR THE LINUXFROMSCRATCH TEAM to the disclaimer in
fw-disclaimer.xml to make sure ;-)
3) Modified the xml tags around the Compiling and Installing a new
kernel section to be LFS-standard.
4) All entities have been changed to start ch06-fw- instead of just fw-.
This just makes it easier for me to keep track of what belongs where ;-)

> OK, please have a look at the new layout, and if you still think it to be 
> pointless, remove the synopsis on your own.
I've removed it.  I don't think it was needed.

> PS: Would you do me the please and re-consider my idea regarding a new, 
> general section.
> I'm thinking about a section or chapter containing advices about "how to 
> configure the kernel if one needs a certain/given feature" -> I'd prefer to 
> have fw-kernel.xml put in there than in firewalling.xml.
Ok.  I'll think about it.  Where should it go though?  Maybe as an
appendix B - Compiling the Kernel..  That seems like a good idea
actually.  Opinions please.


Mark Hymers					 BLFS Editor
markh at
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list