Re: [RFR] templates://lirc/{lirc-modules-source.templates,lirc.templates}
MJ Ray wrote:
> Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> wrote:
>> Please send reviews as unified diffs (diff -u) against the original
>> files. Comments about your proposed changes will be appreciated.
>
> The original files don't seem to be attached. Did you mean your
> modified files?
No, the originals (i.e. the version in the current package).
> However, my suggested changes to this one are small:
>
>> + The list of needed kernel modules and their parameters may be
>> + guessed from your previous answers.
>
> "Needed" seems vague here - how badly does it need them? We have a
> richer collection of adjectives that we use for needed packages - can
> we use them here? Do we mean required or suggested or what?
The obvious synonyms all suggest a dpkg dependency. The question is
what modules users need built to support their hardware.
> There's
> also an "unneeded" later which sounds unnatural to me.
Me too, though it seems to be commoner in US English.
>> + Please choose whether you want such automatic selection to happen.
>>
>> Summarize the action we expect from the user.
>
> More direct: "Please choose whether to do this automatic selection."
How about something like this?
Your previous answers can be used as a basis for guessing the list of
kernel modules that should be built, along with their parameters.
.
Please choose whether this should happen.
--
JBR
Ankh kak! (Ancient Egyptian blessing)
Reply to: