LFS 6.4 Book HTML

genericmaillists at gmail.com genericmaillists at gmail.com
Mon Apr 6 13:54:09 PDT 2009

For 30 years I have been involved in different parts of 
manufacturing, assemblyline production, machine design and 
eventually I became a training instructor of CAD software in an 
engineering department or as an independent contractor/consultant.

Production drawings have revisions all the time but the name/number 
does not change. Those revision changes are document directly on 
the drawing in a revision block. Clean, simple less chance for 
mistakes because the person looking at/reading the drawing has the 
documented change in front of them. Production drawings are a vital 
means of communication. If changes were kept some where else, and 
the potential audience was required to remember to look in another 
place for changes there would be a lot of big costly mistakes.

I appreciate what the team on the LFS project is trying to do but in 
places it is sloppy and complicated. Most software developers like 
to take short cuts with their documentation, if they document at 
all, this can cause confusion for anyone not up to speed with what 
they are doing.

In section 5.21, Gawk-3.1.6, the paragraph starting "Compilation is 
now complete." should be after the make command.

In the same section the sentence that reads "The is necessary..." 
should read :This is necessary...".

The above is found at


This does not change any software or end user procedure as suggested 
in the book. It does fix a sloppy mistake in how this part of the 
book was written.

This format follows old technology that can't do it a better way. 
This is foolish. This is what I was talking about. This has nothing 
to do with version control that would be necessary to keep things 
from getting broken and totally messed up.

Instead of doing an errata for something as minor as this, just fix 
the document. This will not require a version number change because 
this will not alter the process, it will help cut down on 

On the download page where the document can be downloaded put a 
message that says the document link on this page always points to 
the current version of the book.

I am not saying make software changes to the process and then add 
that to the book with the same release number. Doing process 
changes does require a version number change.

The LFS book is supposed to be about helping people learn how to 
build their own Linux OS. It appears to be mostly a reference 
manual with very limited training help for any one new to such a 
process. It requires the reader to know certain things, nothing 
wrong with that. If the book is going to tell the reader to do a 
process then tell all the details of the process don't expect the 
reader to have to make assumptions as to how to do that process or 
what was meant.

There are a lot of places where the book is not clear. Unfortunately 
there are some who think one does not deserve help if they don't 
understand something or they think they are lazy because they don't 
remember something they read earlier. Some people like to have 
things in front of them. Some like to keep it all in their head. It 
is easy for some one who keeps it in their head to remember what 
they read several pages or chapters earlier but it is not for those 
who like to have it in front of them. People process information 

I would like to see the LFS team be a lot more open to suggestions 
that will help make the entire product (The Book) better.

If someone thinks something in the book is clear... don't attack the 
person that does not think it is clear. Try to understand why they 
don't think it is clear. Yes, there are situations where it is easy 
to see when someone is just being lazy.

Do those on the LFS team want to help people who want to learn how 
to build a Linux OS who are:

A) below their level of understanding

B) at their level of understanding

C) above their level of understanding

D) All the above

E) B and C only


More information about the lfs-support mailing list