From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 12 04:19:49 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7273516A418 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 04:19:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1C4FB13C455 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 04:19:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 9585 invoked by uid 399); 12 Jan 2008 04:19:48 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.4?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2008 04:19:48 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 Message-ID: <47883FDD.2080004@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:19:41 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gregoryd.freebsd@free.fr References: <200801101950.m0AJo3uX031647@freefall.freebsd.org> <1200036455.47871a67e2639@imp.free.fr> In-Reply-To: <1200036455.47871a67e2639@imp.free.fr> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org, Marc Fonvieille Subject: Re: docs/119536: a few typos in French handbook (basics) X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 04:19:49 -0000 gregoryd.freebsd@free.fr wrote: > Quoting Marc Fonvieille : > >> It's not really the objective of the footnote. The text is about the >> fact that even you are not using a 386 CPU (for example a 486 or a >> Pentium) you are still using an i386 architecture. > > Oh. > OK. Then I totally missed that one :-( (sorry) > > Rereading the footnote with that in mind, I can see the true meaning. > But I still do find it a little bit misleading: shouldn't we explicit the fact > that we are talking about newer versions of an x86 CPU ? > Either by emphasizing the "386" word, or saying something like "even if you are > running FreBSD on a newer x86, such as a pentium, this is going to be i386.." > > Might not a reader with another architecture altogether think, reading the > sentence "even if you are not running FreeBSD on an Intel 386 CPU, this is going > to be i386", that "i386" should appear even if she is using a sparc, or whatever > ? > Of course I may very well be the only one to misread that kind of info ;-) > (in which case, just ignore my remarks) I agree that (based on the English translation in the PR) the meaning is not clear. If it were me I would say something like, "The i386 architecture covers several processor families, including ...." and list the most relevant elements. Then go on to describe the other architectures and what they cover. hope this helps, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection