Gerard Beekmans wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
the result of running the command was (especially in the case of 'ln')
Do you mean to say that the book would then also show all the to-be
expected output?
No. The expected output should be obvious, therefore it should also be
obvious to the reader when they made a mistake.
Do you propose to add them everywhere? Adding -v options to things like
gcc and ld processes would cause for quite a bit of extra output.
No, I'm thinking mainly of the utilities from coreutils. Obviously gcc
and ld are out of the question as, like you say, their verbose output
actually hides what we'd usually consider the useful output (compiler
warnings/errors). Admittedly, the verbose output can be useful in cases
where one wants to see the header search dirs or similar details, but
that's far from the normal case.
As the general consensus seems to be in favour of this proposal, I'll
start going through the book adding the verbose flag where I see fit.
If, after doing so, someone spots something they think I missed, or
erroneously added the flag to, they can of course find a suitably sized
cluebat to hit me with :)
Cheers,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
