Changeset 7739ad3

Timestamp:

10/15/2022 06:25:26 PM (19 months ago)

Author:

David Bryant <davidbryant@…>

Branches:

11.3, 11.3-rc1, 12.0, 12.0-rc1, 12.1, 12.1-rc1, bdubbs/gcc13, multilib, renodr/libudev-from-systemd, trunk, xry111/arm64, xry111/arm64-12.0, xry111/clfs-ng, xry111/loongarch, xry111/loongarch-12.0, xry111/loongarch-12.1, xry111/mips64el, xry111/pip3, xry111/update-glibc

Children:

2e45b62

Parents:

e0ae8cb

Message:

Edited for English idiom and general readability. Fixed some
punctuation here and there.

File:

• prologue/architecture.xml (modified) (2 diffs)

prologue/architecture.xml

@@ -14 +14 @@
 and x86_64 (64-bit) CPUs.  On the other hand, the instructions in this book are
 also known to work, with some modifications, with the Power PC and ARM CPUs. To
-build a system that utilizes one of these CPUs, the main prerequisite, in
+build a system that utilizes one of these alternative CPUs, the main prerequisite, in
 addition to those on the next page, is an existing Linux system such as an
-earlier LFS installation, Ubuntu, Red Hat/Fedora, SuSE, or other distribution
-that targets the architecture that you have. Also note that a 32-bit
+earlier LFS installation, Ubuntu, Red Hat/Fedora, SuSE, or some other distribution
+that targets that architecture. (Note that a 32-bit
 distribution can be installed and used as a host system on a 64-bit AMD/Intel
-computer.</para>
+computer.)</para>
 
-<para>For building LFS, the gain of building on a 64-bit system
-compared to a 32-bit system is minimal.
+<para>The gain from building on a 64-bit system, as
+compared to a 32-bit system, is minimal.
 For example, in a test build of LFS-9.1 on a Core i7-4790 CPU based system,
 using 4 cores, the following statistics were measured:</para>
@@ -31 +31 @@
 
 <para>As you can see, on the same hardware, the 64-bit build is only 3% faster
-and is 22% larger than the 32-bit build. If you plan to use LFS as a LAMP
-server, or a firewall, a 32-bit CPU may be largely sufficient. On the other
-hand, several packages in BLFS now need more than 4GB of RAM to be built
-and/or to run, so that if you plan to use LFS as a desktop, the LFS authors
-recommend building on a 64-bit system.</para>
+(and 22% larger) than the 32-bit build. If you plan to use LFS as a LAMP
+server, or a firewall, a 32-bit CPU may be good enough. On the other
+hand, several packages in BLFS now need more than 4 GB of RAM to be built
+and/or to run; if you plan to use LFS as a desktop, the LFS authors
+recommend building a 64-bit system.</para>
 
-<para>The default 64-bit build that results from LFS is considered a
+<para>The default 64-bit build that results from LFS is a
 <quote>pure</quote> 64-bit system. That is, it supports 64-bit executables
 only. Building a <quote>multi-lib</quote> system requires compiling many
 applications twice, once for a 32-bit system and once for a 64-bit system.
 This is not directly supported in LFS because it would interfere with the
-educational objective of providing the instructions needed for a
-straightforward base Linux system. Some LFS/BLFS editors maintain a fork
-of LFS for multilib, which is accessible at <ulink
-url="https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~thomas/multilib/index.html"/>. But it
-is an advanced topic.</para>
+educational objective of providing the minimal instructions needed for a
+basic Linux system. Some of the LFS/BLFS editors maintain a multilib fork
+of LFS, accessible at <ulink
+url="https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~thomas/multilib/index.html"/>. But
+that's an advanced topic.</para>
 
 </sect1>