Very minor issue with text in "Changing Ownership" in Chapter 6

[Chris Staub]

Randy McMurchy wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure I've been "confused" by the statement, but I've always
> thought it was pointless. Sure, there is merit to everything said
> before that last sentence, but the last sentence is unnecessary.
> Nothing can come of it if you don't do the chown, other than what is
> already explained about some other user gaining inadvertent ownership.
> 
> I suppose though, that you could look at it like this:
> 
> The LFS book gives two alternatives on what to do: 1)leave it owned
> by the LFS user and create this user on your new system or 2)chown it
> to be owned by root.
> 
> The book says it assumes you ran the chown command. Why it says that,
> is what you and I think can be done away with. I'm not sure why
> anyone should be "confused" about it. The book lists two alternatives,
> and says it assumes you did one of the two.
> 
> Not very confusing to me.

I guess I just read a little more into it than I should bother to. :p As 
I said, a statement like that seems to imply that the book's 
instructions would somehow change if you didn't run the command, so I 
was a bit confused over what in the book would be done differently - 
that's what I meant. But clearly the answer is "nothing". Though it 
probably wouldn't hurt to replace that sentence with something like "It 
is strongly recommended to run this chown command in case you do plan to 
keep $LFS/tools." Or would even that be redundant?