On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Adam Thompson wrote:
On 2010-Feb-27 16:46, Luke wrote:However, if the /path/to stuff really serves some purpose (as in: there are two ledgersmb13 directories? although how this would differentiate that, I don't know), I suppose it could stay. Still, the section title, and its extraneous slash, should change, imho.It serves a purpose so long as there is no actual directory named "ledgersmb13". The "/path/to/" idiom is sufficient (at least for me) to make it clear that it refers to the top-level directory of the installed application.My opinion is that anyone reading this document knows enough to include the appropriate above-ledgersmb13 path, or change directories to get above it, or whatever, in order to execute chown or chmod as needed. If not, they're probably using an automated install, and not reading the install doc for these details.Or they're seeing the software for the first time (like me) and don't have the a priori knowledge of whether this refers to the install directory or if they're missing a subdirectory called "ledgersmb13".
/path/to would not give them that knowledge. Accurate docs would.
After all, there is a subdirectory called "LedgerSMB/", it's equally conceivable - for newbies - that it has the wrong name.
Only if, as you say, /path/to/ledgersmb13 doesn't actually exist anywhere, which imho is a documentation bug.
I was _reasonably_ certain, given the context, that the docs were only talking about the base install path itself, but from that angle - I'd say anyone reading this document probably already knows that apache needs to be able to read the files.
Maybe, but permissions are not always a given. It may not need to read all files, for example. In SL, I believe there were some things it wasn't supposed to be able to read. So specificity of permissions makes sense to me, whereas laying out a fake /path/to/ledgersmb13 doesn't particularly, if it leaves the user guessing. Of course, I'm sure that was just an oversight which won't survive the beta.
I still wasn't sure which directory "ledgersmb13" referred to. I figured if it was important enough to mention specially like that, it must be something out of the ordinary. Until I found the other references to /path/to/ledgersmb13 which made it reasonably clear, anyway.
To cover your case, which I grant (as indicating the root ledgersmb installation), it should really say something like /usr/share/local/ledgersmb13, or what ever it is intended by the scripts to be. Distributions will customize the docs, or generate a README.Distribution with corrected paths, and including the actual supposed path makes searches and replacements for that purpose a snap instead of a slog.
For that matter, Ubuntu and Debian packages probably won't include files at this level, because they will have already done it to convension. So I revise my idea to replacing /path/to with the actual path to.:)
Luke