[pocket-linux] Proof reading help needed for Pocket Linux Guide

[David Horton]

> David:
> 
> I took a quick look at the update and noted you will point people to
> coreutils iso the fileutils, textutils, and sh-utils.  I'd ask that you
> reconsider the change.  Building coreutils takes more resources than
> building each of the three separate packages.  For example, I have an old
> Pentium 90mhz system with 64M RAM that can't build the coreutils package
> (it core dumps and while I haven't examined the core file, I suspect that
> it the system needed more memory than was available).  That machine has no
> problems building each of the 3 smaller packages.  In the very least, I
> believe you should provide a footnote stating that reader should download
> and build the 3 packages if the coreutils package won't build.
> 

I chose coreutils because it is now the latest version and I'm trying to
stay current with all of the packages.  I'm guessing that the problems
with building it might be workstation related.  I have had no problems
building on a P-133/64M machine.

> One other note, while working through the PL guide the first time I
noticed
> that a number of the packages contain nls support as a default.  In
fact, I
> noticed this because one package (I don't recall which) generated
errors as
> the po files were being processed.  You can reduce the size of each
package
> by disabling nls when running configure.  That is, add the --disable-nls
> command line switch to the ./configure command line.  The reduced package
> size means you can fit more onto the root disk.
> 

How much does this reduce the size of the binary?  Is it a significant
amount?  I've never actually done a side-by-side comparison.  If the
resulting binary is not that much different in size I'd like to keep the
NLS support in.  Just for the fact that I don't want people to start
thinking that NLS is bad and should be taken out in all cases.


> I've looked over local_fs script and it looks different from the previous
> version of the document.  I don't understand the rationale for some of the
> changes, for example, why did you find it necessary to wipe out /etc/mtab?
> I also feel that the method you use ("echo -n > /etc/mtab") warrants at
> least a comment in the script.
> 

What about an FAQ for each chapter?  Do you think something like this
could provide answers without making the guide too wordy?

> Anyway, I hope I'm not becoming too annoying with the comments.
> 
> Thanks,
> Michael.
> 

Comments are always good.  That how things get fixed and improved.


Dave