On 6/25/2009 6:11 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Alan Cox writes: > >> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 04:07:07 -0700 >> Kevin Bowling <kevinb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> 2 out of 5 failures. F10->F11 is completely unusable for any kind of >>> "uncommon" setup, i.e. LDAP login, Linux RAID, Xen DomU. Anything >>> other than one IDE hard disk with default layout really. >> >> 2 out of 5 ? - I got 3 out of 4 fails including hitting error paths that >> clearly were not tested because the error printing code didn't work but >> spewed python traces - and yes its in bugzilla already. > > By the time I'm done, I expect 5 for 5 failures (so far, I'm 2 out of > 2). Starting with F9, Anaconda reliably failed to install grub for me, > on every one of my machines, despite that they're all different. Some > have one IDE hard drive, others use softraid on top of a pair of SCSI > drives. Some are i386, others x86_64. There is no common denominator > that I can see. > > So far, now with F11, on the first two machines, Anaconda keeps failing > to install Grub, so I have to do it. I have no reason to believe that > the remaining three won't be any different. > Say this again please? "By the time I'm done, I expect 5 for 5 failures". Are you crazy. "By the time I'm done, I expect 5 for 5 failures". The odds sux! How many failures would expect from clean, fresh installs? Would a "clean, fresh install" and then have to reconfigure 'something/any/many things, be a disaster? As opposed to an "By the time I'm done, I expect 5 for 5 failures" upgrade followed by a "clean, fresh install?", as opposed to a fresh install to begin with first, and a re-configure after? -- David -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
