command-line-cleanup #59
No reviewers
Labels
No Label
blocked
bug
build
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
finger
gemini
gopher
help wanted
http
in progress
invalid
local
needs-info
non-code
non-functional
non-urgent
question
release
rendering
suggestion
telnet
terminal
urgent
wontfix
No Milestone
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: sloum/bombadillo#59
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "asdf/bombadillo:command-line-cleanup"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
This change is meant to be completed after the makefile branch is merged in.
The PR contains small enhancements for the command line options
-h
and-v
and associated documentation.Some wording may be unified in multiple areas, such as the subtitle "a non-web client" being added after the title "Bombadillo".
(hoping this can be merged after makefile branch with no issues...)
I don't know if there is much else to change for this PR. Let me know if any suggestions or issues.
Looks good. A couple small things, but otherwise approved.
@ -21,3 +21,3 @@
git clone https://tildegit.org/sloum/bombadillo.git
cd bombadillo
go install
sudo make install
This should be:
@ -32,3 +44,3 @@
#### Troubleshooting
If you run `bombadillo` and get `bombadillo: command not found`, try running `go build` from within the cloned repo. Then try: `./bombadillo`. If that works it means that Go does not install to your path. `go build` added an executable file to the repo directory. Move that file to somewhere on your path. I suggest `/usr/local/bin` on most systems, but that may be a matter of personal preference.
If you run `bombadillo` and get `bombadillo: command not found`, try running `make` from within the cloned repository. Next, try: `./bombadillo`. If this works, it means that the installation was not completed to an area in your `PATH`.
I'm not sure that this is still relevant. They should be running make as part of the initial install anyway. The path part is still relevant for sure.
Do we want to mention that the standard go commands of
build
andinstall
are also still valid options for installing the program, but that they are not recommended as they will not also isntall the documentation? Or should we just leave that to people to figure out on their own?Waiting on #57 before further action is taken.
The changes specific to this PR are now easily visible. Please note that the commits were duplicated because I had to rebase.
This looks good. I approve. I think the change in the readme may need to get shifted up a bit depending on how the remaining open PR goes, but I think we are good to go merging this in.
Merging in :)