Bug#619510: Debian Reference improvements
Package: debian-reference
Version: 2.46
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>, <envite@rolamasao.org>
Hi,
Thanks for your review of my text.
In order not to loose this .... I am making this as a bug report.
Anyway, see the whole text of "1.2.1. Unix file basics":
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch01.en.html#_unix_file_basics
When you only read PO file, you may miss larger structure.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:57:38PM +0000, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
> While translating, I've encontered some bits that can be improved:
>
> #: debian-reference.en.xmlt:1472
> msgid "All <emphasis role=\"strong\">fully-qualified filenames</emphasis>
> begin with the \"<literal>/</literal>\" directory, and there's a
> \"<literal>/</literal>\" between each directory or file in the filename. The
> first \"<literal>/</literal>\" is the top level directory, and the other
> \"<literal>/</literal>\"'s separate successive subdirectories, until we reach
> the last entry which is the name of the actual file. The words used here can
> be confusing. Take the following <emphasis role=\"strong\">fully-qualified
> filename</emphasis> as an example:
> \"<literal>/usr/share/keytables/us.map.gz</literal>\". However, people also
> refers to its basename \"<literal>us.map.gz</literal>\" alone as a filename."
>
I agree this is not the best text ...
> Should the example be explained? Text can be:
>
> ... which means file \"<literal>us.map.gz</literal>\" in the directory
> \"<literal>keytables</literal>\" which is in the
> directory\"<literal>share</literal>\", which in turn is into the directory
> \"<literal>usr</literal>\" that you can find in the root (top level) directory
> \"<literal>/</literal>\". However...
I fail to understand how exactly your suggested modification needs to be
done. Also, repetitive "which" is annoying to my taste.
As I reread my text, I am assuming people know directory can be created
under another directory etc. This is "*Unix* file basics" and I am
assuming people to know "file basics".
> Other one is:
>
> #: debian-reference.en.xmlt:1477
> msgid "The root directory has a number of branches, such as
> \"<literal>/etc/</literal>\" and \"<literal>/usr/</literal>\". These
> subdirectories in turn branch into still more subdirectories, such as
> \"<literal>/etc/init.d/</literal>\" and \"<literal>/usr/local/</literal>\".
> The whole thing viewed collectively is called the <emphasis
> role=\"strong\">directory tree</emphasis>. You can think of an absolute
> filename as a route from the base of the tree (\"<literal>/</literal>\") to
> the end of some branch (a file). You also hear people talk about the
> directory tree as if it were a <emphasis role=\"strong\">family</emphasis>
> tree: thus subdirectories have <emphasis role=\"strong\">parents</emphasis>,
> and a path shows the complete ancestry of a file. There are also relative
> paths that begin somewhere other than the root directory. You should remember
> that the directory \"<literal>../</literal>\" refers to the parent directory.
> This terminology also applies to other directory like structures, such as
> hierarchical data structures."
>
> Should be explicited that genealogy tree most senior node is / ? Text can be:
I thought it was written earlier.
> ...where the grandparent of all files and directories is the root directory
> \"<literal>/</literal>\". There are...
Anyway, reviewing text in PO format is dificult. Just before this text,
I see:
* The root directory means root of the filesystem referred as simply "/".
Don't confuse this with the home directory for the root user: "/root".
* Every directory has a name which can contain any letters or symbols
except "/". The root directory is an exception; its name is "/"
(pronounced "slash" or "the root directory") and it cannot be renamed.
Should I repeat the same point?
Osamu
Reply to: