On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 18:37 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: > (thanks, Ben, for your comments. I was of course expecting them as it > is a little bit fun to see a Frenglish speaker reviewing texts for a > native speaker who is known as very clever with his own language..:-)) > > > > This is a quite important review as some of these strings are likely > > > to appear during the system install. Some other will also appear > > > during kernel upgrades and, I guess, particularly for lenny->squeeze > > > upgrades. > > > > Actually, they shouldn't appear during install. > > I went on this because of a recent report in D-I from a user who was > surprised to not see the template mentioning potentially mimssing > firmware. *this* one is likely to appear for some users, isn't it? This is supposed to catch cases where the current installation depends on firmware blobs embedded in drivers, which have subsequently been remove. Since the release of lenny we have only removed blobs at the same time as switching to new upstream versions, so the check is made conditional on the new kernel package's upstream version being later than the running kernel. This is not normally true during installation of a stable release, although it can be true for installation of testing/unstable. Debian-installer has its own check and prompts for missing firmware and that is what users should normally see during installation. Finally, I think we can remove this check altogether after squeeze as there are no more non-free blobs to remove. > Anywa, even if it doesn't, I think that having that round of review > and of course the translation update round that will follow is still a > good improvement we can bring. After all, we're talking about a > somehow important package, right? ;-) Sure. > > > I feel like "ID" is more appropriate than lowercas "id" as acronyms > > > are generally using uppercase. However, the current practice and > > > existing documentation may lead to keep "id". > > > > 'id' is short for 'identifier' and there is no reason to capitalise an > > abbreviation of a single word. I believe 'ID' in capitals originally > > stood for identity document, and while it is commonly used simply for > > 'identifier' it annoys my pedantic nature. > > OK. Point taken. Reverting to "id". I was explaining my reasoning, but I accept that ID is more common and may be more understandable. So, no need to revert. [...] > I changed it another way. This time mostly because I think that a > separate sentence has better chances to be catched by the target > audience (MIPS users): > > You should identify these devices by UUID or label. This is however > not supported for the root device of MIPS systems. [...] One more try: "You should generally identify these devices by UUID or label. However, on MIPS systems the root device must be identified by name." Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part