[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [RFR] Installation Guide - update of apt-setup section for multiple CDs

Hash: SHA1

Jens Seidel wrote:
> > If you are installing from a full CD or a DVD that is part of a larger
> I would drop the "a" infront of DVD or "full" altogeher.

I'd rather say that you should drop the full here, since the "is part of
a larger set" implies a full CD anyway, so how about:

  If you are installing from a CD or DVD that is part of a larger set

>> +currently in the drive. Note that only CDs or DVDs that belong to the
>> +same set should be scanned.
> Really? I should avoid mixing a weekly snapshot of the first 5 CDs with
> older onces of the remaining CDs? Wouldn't it be possible that a missing
> dependency can be resolved on an older disc?

No -- dependencies are always satisfied on earlier disks, and while
having some older ones tagged on the end might work, it might cause
upset when things on the earlier disks have been upgraded such that they
no longer satisfy later dependencies on the later disks.

Also, if things on the earlier disks have grown, then some packages will
have fallen off the end of the last new disk you have, but still be
missing on the old one that you might have thought follows it.

>> +using a network mirror is not required, but is still strongly recommended
>> +because a single CD contains only a fairly limited number of packages.
>> +of a network mirror is optional. One advantage of adding a network mirror is
>> +that it will make updates of packages in point releases of the distribution
> Please check grammar "in point releases"??? Is just a "available"
> missing.?
>> +available for installation.

I think you have a point here -- how about:

  One advantage of adding a network mirror is that updates that have
  occurred since the CD/DVS set was made, and are part of a newer point
  release, will become available for installation, thus extending the
  life of your CD/DVD set without compromising the security or stability
  of the installed system.

Other than that, I'm afraid I'd tend to disagree with most of the other
points you made (although well done for putting the effort in).  You
appear to be applying grammatical rules in a way that, while perhaps
strictly correct, doesn't end up sounding like natural English (of
course, being English, the only grammar I was ever taught at school was
in Latin & French, so perhaps I'm not qualified to comment on English
grammar ;-)

Finally, one change I spotted:

> In most cases you are better of getting

Cheers, Phil.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: