Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Aug 2001 01:13:28 -0500
From:      "=?iso-8859-1?Q?L=E1szl=F3?= L. Orosz" <lorosz@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
To:        doc@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Text-covering and overlapping figure images
Message-ID:  <3B889388.5FF3B66B@suffolk.lib.ny.us>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gentlemen:

There are some rendering problems with Figures 2.3 through 2.6: these
figures are located over text fields.  Thus, the text underneath them
cannot be read that jeopardizes the understandability of the whole
chapter.  Furthermore, Figures 2.4 through 2.6 overlap to a degree that
only parts of two figures can be seen.

In addition, I have some general observation as follows:

The list of supported components is rather outdated.  Anything that is
over five-year old should be put in an antiquated or legacy component
category.  But, well established and upcoming new components should be
listed.  Instead SCSI boards from the '80s and early '90s I like to see
CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, CD-RW and DVD-RW units, USB and fire-wire components.

Though, it may not be incorrect, but it is definitely unrealistic to try
to install multiple operating systems on a 4GB hard drive in 2001.
Obviously, using at least a 40GB hard drive in the example would be more
realistic.  There is a similar problem with the space requirement.
Nowadays, when a browser can take up close to 100MB, it is rather
hopeless to try jam everything in 2GB!

I also find somewhat naive to assume that the DOS and Windoze duet would
live in a studio apartment called C:.  I, for example, use C: through I:
for them, and having root, home, usr and swap partitions for Linux, and
have a tight 12GB left for FreeBSD.  I am really not sure that that
amount will be enough in early 2002.  What perhaps is more important
that this set up would force the description to deal with logical
partitions, too.  What about bringing in the picture a second hard
drive?  Using the word slice is not a great help.  It rather fogs the
mental picture of disk utilization.  Is it fundamentally different from
a partition?  Does FreeBSD requests using a contiguous disk region?  Has
that region to be a primary partition, or start on a primary partition,
or can be a set of logical partitions?  Using only primary partitions in
the examples makes the description formally simpler, but leaves the
subject incomplete.

Respectfully                                             László L. Orosz


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B889388.5FF3B66B>