On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 10:14 -0800, George Arseneault wrote: > --- Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 10:58 -0800, George Arseneault > > wrote: > > > The DVD is the equivalent of the 5 CD set so I > > don't > > > think it counts as a 'one disk install'. It was > > also > > > dual layer. > > > > I wouldn't have thought it necessary. 5 Cd's should > > fit onto a single > > layer DVD. > > Necessary or not, it wouldn't work in my DVD drive. > (It's about 8 years old though) My friend said it was > probably because the disk was dual-layered, since his > drive could read it and his wife's could not. (a > slightly newer but still not dual-layer drive) > > Could be that no one even considered that it would be > a factor with the end user. After all, you can use the > CD to start an install through other media (LAN, web, > etc.) or just download the iso's for the 5 Cd's. (They > did list the address in the front of the book) > I am surprised that for bulk distribution (and in a magazine or book that certainly counts as bulk) they would use dual layer DVD especially when the ISO does not require dual layer. Weirder things have happened though. It certainly stands to reason that they did not consider the average end user in making that selection. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
