[syslinux] Patching doc/syslinux.txt, partialy because #647603 on Debian

[Regid Ichira]

--- On Sat, 12/10/11, Gene Cumm <gene cumm gmail com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 20:06, Regid
> Ichira <regid23 at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >  My reason for patching circa line 225 is that I
> think it is
> > clearer.  The reason for patching circa line 575
> is
> 
> I'm not sure why "default" doesn't appear clear.
> 

  To me it wasn't clear what is the context in which 
the word "default" is required.  Actually, while
writing this response, I am still confused.  By the
the next few lines it appears to be tied to the file 
name extension. Yet, if I write a LINUX command then
what will be taken as a default? Is it that the label 
will be taken as a linux image? Why is a default 
required with a LINUX command?

> > http://bugs.debian.org/647603.  They concluded
> that a .0 file is
> > recognized not only by PXELINUX.
> This is a bug per a discussion with hpa after your
> email.  I believe it may
> be possible but is pretty messy.
> 

  I think the documentation should describe accurately
the current actions of the software.