[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#823895: RFS: lsm/1.0.4-1




On 21-05-2016 12:21, Adam Borowski wrote:
> 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,k
>>> 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.
>
>
I've got a little busy, but I uploaded a reviewed package,
if you can take a look at it I'll thanks.

https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lsm/lsm_1.0.4-1.dsc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: