Am 13.05.2012 23:38, schrieb Wolfgang Denk:
Dear Alexander,
In message4FB01720.90402@ahsoftware.de you wrote:
Sorry, it seems you just are unable or yiu don't want to understand the problem. So here is my last message on this topic, trying to explain it for you.
I'm sorry you are giving up so early, just one resubmit before getting this into an acceptable state.
So one just tells the user(s) that if they want to change some option they just have to create a text file on a specific place which contains a line like e.g.
I guess this is the point where the problem starts. You should not write anywhere "they just have to create a text file", because "a text file" is not a precise enough definition of the required input format.
The only problem is that such a description currently only works for Linux users. ...
The problem is not Windows users versus Linux users here. The problem is unsufficient information.
... I don't know with what devices and users you are dealing,but there are some people out in the wild which don't know (much) about Linux, or even about the difference in line endings between text files creates using Windows or Linux. Some of them even just want to use their device.
In either case, people are usually pretty good in following pre-canned recipies for doing things.
Instead of "create a text file" one could for example document that "a UNIX style text file, i. e. with only "\n" line endings (and not the DOS-derived "\r\n" line endings) is needed". One could add some description that "on Windows systems, the command ... can be used to convert a DOS file into this format" (and provide a URL where to get this tool), "while on UNIX systems like Linux the dos2unix tool can be used".
If you then add an example suitable for copy& paste you can solve a very large percentage of the propblems you see now.
Sorry, but you are just describing one of the oldest dreams (not only) in IT.
You can write whatever you wish, users are able to not read it, to misread it, to ignore it, not to understand it or it will get missing in an one-line copy of the original multine description.
Regards,
Alexander