On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 12:09:14PM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote: > On 21-05-2016 11:59, Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:31:49PM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote: > >> But I don't think I need to write a documentation how to setup > >> the config file is easy to understand, just feeding back it's needed to > >> setup to get working. > >> what do you think? > > I meant mostly what's needed to get the basics running. > My problem I didn't noticed problem about setup needed because I've > installed at a machine was already working.
Right, that's understandable. If you're going to make complex changes to the packaging, it'd be a good idea to test it in virtual machines, both fresh and as upgrades. However, if you believe you can make it work without, there's no need to do so -- I'll test it for you as I already have an array of VMs, some simple, some bridged/etc. And especially, some with systemd some with modular inits, as this package has .service divergent from its init script. > > I got the impression you're -trying- to have it work out of the box, in > > which case no action is needed. If I'm wrong and configuration is required, > > then you need to 1. handle lack of such config gracefully, and 2. point the > > user as to what needs to be done. > I've done the most changed you pointed, either the feedback about that > setup is needed to get it running. > my question is just about user perspective, if I really need to write a > documentation how to configure or > just show to user they need to setup. Something like "Edit > /etc/lsm/lsm.conf is needed to get it running." Just that line included in the fail message would be enough, I think. -- An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.
