sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:22:18 -0700
On Tuesday 15 April 2008 01:38:35 Karsten Behrmann wrote:
<snip>
> Hmm, point.
> Maybe an /etc/examples/ or /usr/share/doc/examples/ (bleh) populated
> by us?
> The reason I don't like crunching all the examples into one file is
> that it's a long read.
>
> It doesn't matter as much with files like fstab, in which order is pretty
> much irrelevant and you can just go
> # ===== examples below this line, skip on first read =====
>
> On the other hand, when you're a new user editing his lilo.conf, I'd
> certainly not want to have to delete a bunch of lines to get it to work
> (neccessary with the current lilo.conf.example), and I'd rather not have
> to read through hundreds of lines documenting obscure features until I
> find the line where I put that "append=noapic" that makes my box boot.
>
> So in summary, I think we serve new (or hasty) users better if our default
> files are a small and essential, and all the "reference" stuff is put
> somewhere where you don't need to scroll through just to get your system
> set up.
>
> Just My Humble Opinion, of course.
>
> So Far,
> Karsten
To me, it's the other way. As a new user (to an OS or to a specific
application) I prefer well-documented configuration files. I can always
remove
the comments later.
For the specific lilo.conf example, just have all the examples commented out
by
default. ;)
Either way, as long as all of the examples are available somewhere (I prefer
*in* the actual config file ;)), and people know/are told where to find them,
I'll be happy.
-sandalle
--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | http://counter.li.org/ #196285
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Eric Sandall, 04/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/11/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322, Eric Sandall, 04/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Arjan Bouter, 04/11/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322, David Kowis, 04/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik, 04/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Karsten Behrmann, 04/11/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322, Eric Sandall, 04/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
David Kowis, 04/11/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322, Eric Sandall, 04/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Karsten Behrmann, 04/15/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Eric Sandall, 04/15/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322, David Kowis, 04/15/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Eric Sandall, 04/15/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322, David Kowis, 04/13/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Testing of devel ISO 20080322,
Eric Sandall, 04/11/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.