Found some grammar mistakes

Bill's LFS Login lfsbill at wlmcs.com
Tue Feb 11 04:57:10 PST 2003


Unsnipped so that G. can just look at one.

On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Nathan Ladd wrote:

> I read through the first three chapters and founds some grammer mistakes
> and some confusing or vague areas.  I'd make a patch, but some of this
> stuff y'all might decide isn't worth changing, so I figure it's better
> to lay them out as more suggestions than anything.  Where wording
> cleanup is deemed necessary, I have tried to preserve the original
> words as much as possible (I don't want to trample here).
>
> In Chapter 1 (Introduction), Mailing lists and archives,
>     - In the lfs-book entry, "It is important that all development..."
>       should be "It is important to note that all development..."

I think the original is alright, grammatically. Your version's emphasis
is towards making the sentence active (we want you to note that...)
rather identifying a status (something is important). This is a matter
of style.

>     - In the lfs-chat entry, "It's a place where anything goes, nothing
>       is off-topic." should be "It's a place where anything goes;
>       nothing is off-topic."  (Note the semi-colon)
>     - In the lfs-security entry, "and other things to do with secure
>       systems" should be "and other things having to do with securing
>       systems"

I would reword this to "and other things related to securing systems".

>
> Also, in Chapter 2, About SBUs,
>     - "The biggest problem is that times cannot be accurate, not even a
>       little bit" should be "The biggest problem is that times cannot be
>       accurate; not even a little bit"
>     - "so many different systems, the times" should be "so many
>       different systems, that the times"
>     - "The time it takes to compile this package will be the basis and
>       called the SBU. All other compile times are relative to the time
>       it takes to install Bash."  should be reworded as follows:
>
>       "The time it takes to compile this package will become the
>       unit of measurement (one "Static Bash Unit") used for estimating
>       how long it will take the other packages to compile."
>     - "For example, GCC-3.2 takes about 9.5 SBUs and it's proven that
>       this number is fairly consistent among a lot of different systems.
>       Therefore, multiply 9.5 by the number of seconds it takes for Bash
>       to install (the SBU value) and you get a close approximation of
>       how long GCC will take on your system." should be reworded as
>       follows:
>
>       "For example, for any given system, it is proven that building the
>       current version of gcc takes about nine and a half times {the
>       amount of time that, as long as} static Bash takes to compile.
>       Therefore, the build time for gcc is considered 9.5 Static Bash
>       Units, or SBUs.  In this manner you can get close approximations
>       of how long different packages will take to compile on your
>       system."  Note that "the amount of time that" is more clear, but
>       "as long as" would avoid repetition of the word "time."
>
> In Chapter 2, How to ask for help,
>     - "Don't blindly include the whole thing but on the other hand,
>       don't include too little." should be "Avoid blindly copying
>       everything, but on the other hand make sure there is enough
>       output for us to make heads or tails of what went wrong."  This
>       is a rather bold departure (though there was a missing comma
>       error initially), if you replace it with the original, the whole
>       paragraph flows much better.

I think the original is closer to preferred; it is less wordy. "Don't
blindly include everything, but on the other hand,...". A matter of
style.

>     - "Read and follow the hints in that document and you are much more
>       likely to get a response to start with and also to get the help
>       you actually need." should be reworded as follows:
>
>       "If you read and follow the hints in that document, then you will
>       be much more likely to not only get a response but also get the
>       help you actually need."

Didn't go far enough?  "If you read and follow the hints in that
document, you are more likely to get a response and get the help you
actually need."

I guess the "much" could be left in.

> In Chapter 3, Introduction,
>     - "In this chapter the partition which will host the LFS system is
>       prepared. We will create the partition itself, make a file system
>       on it, and mount it." should be "In this chapter the partition
>       where the LFS system will reside will be prepared.  We will create
>       the partition itself, make a file system on it, and then mount
>       it."  (Gotta keep the verb tense the same...also in this case
>       there could be mention of multiple partitions, but I don't know if
>       that's really necessary).
>
> In Chapter 3, Creating a new partition,
>     - In the "For a minimal system..." paragraph, there could be some
>       mention of reclaiming extra disk space from the host distro after
>       the LFS system is independent.
>     - "As we almost never have..." should be "Since we almost never
>       have..."

Original was fine. Could be

"As we seldom have..."

or

"As we often don't have...".

>     - "...seldom-used data to make room in memory..." should become
>       "...seldom-used data in order to make room in memory..."

Original was fine.

>     - "... swap partition, if needed." should be "... swap partition (if
>       needed)" to avoid confusion (it could be read as both the primary
>       and swap partitions not being needed).

He he! Yep. That's one I caught *after* I screwed it up. Alex told me
so! I think Alex's suggestion is better.

"Create a a Linux native partition, and a swap partition if needed."

> In Chapter 3, Creating a filesystem...,
>     - "Now the partition has been made" should be "Now that the
>       partition has been made"
>
> In Chapter 3, Mounting the new partition,
>     - "(say one for / and another for /usr)" should be "(in this case
>       one for / and another for /usr)"

Matter of style. The first is more "conversational", less formal.

-- 
Bill Maltby
lfsbill at wlmcs.com


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



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list