minor remarks on BLFS-BOOK-CVS-2002-04-01

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Tue Apr 30 14:23:40 PDT 2002


Mark Hymers wrote:
> On Wed, 03, Apr, 2002 at 04:38:39PM +0200, Pascal Moucheront spoke thus..
> 
>>a)  For people having FTP access only, it is sometimes difficult to find a
>>mirror.
>>Couldn't you add a FTP download url , for example:
>>chapter 4
>>lcms      ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles/lcms-1.08.tar.gz
>>libpng    ftp://swrinde.nde.swri.edu/pub/png/src/libpng-1.2.1.tar.gz
>>libmng   ftp://ftp.win.ne.jp/pub/graphics/libmng-1.0.3.tar.gz
>>chapter5
>>db        
>>ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles/bdb/db-4.0.14.tar.gz
>>
> That's a fair point.  I think I'll leave it for now.  I'm not happy at
> all with how we display the information at the moment anyways (URL,
> download size, version, compile size).
> 
> Currently it's in (IIRC):
> <para><screen><userinput>
> tags which is blatently wrong.
> 
> I've been trying for a while to think about this and I'm heading towards
> changing it but I'm not sure what to.  Has anyone any thoughts on this
> part?  When we do change this, we should also wherever possible add ftp
> and http download sites at the same time [after all, the LFS book
> contains ftp and http sites].  If anyone has time to dig into the
> docbook spec and find out what would be appropriate for this bit, I'd be
> grateful.
> 
> I also want to change how the dependencies are laid out.  I think we 
> should do them as an itemizedlist:
> 
> <para>XXX depends on:</para>
> 
> <itemizedlist>
> <listitem><para><xref linkend="BLAH1"/></para></listitem>
> <listitem><para><xref linkend="BLAH2"/></para></listitem>
> 
> </para>
> 
> That look OK to everyone?

Mark,
   I think some variation is needed, but ftp links are probably 
preferred to http links.  In the case of XFree86 and KDE, there are a 
lot of files to download.  In those cases, an ftp link to the directory 
and text to say which files to download will look better.  However, I 
have no problems with putting the full ftp link in the anchor reference.

   As far as the dependencies go, I generally like the way it is now. A 
list spreads things out too much vertically.   The issue I have is how 
to present optional dependencies.  That is: why do I need to optional 
package xxx?  There are a lot in KDE.

   -- Bruce

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list