On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 18:02 +0100, Jarosław Górny wrote: > Hi, > > Wiadomość napisana w dniu 2012-02-06, o godz. 17:55, przez Reindl > Harald: > >> in your arguments if you have any. > > > > why do you not read the arguments? > > > > * a new user does not know anything about the menu > > * a new user fall into a boot problem after update > > > If we are considering such a newbie user as you describe, I bet this > user does not know if system update installed a new kernel or not. > (S)he probably does not know what the kernel is. > So, why do you assume, such a user, having grub menu *not* hidden, > will guess, that in case of boot problem (s)he should try to boot > another kernel? Well, they do. Generally what people do when something is broken and they don't really know what or how to fix it is twiddle: they look for something they can poke, and poke it. A boot menu is an excellent example of a twiddle-able interface, if you always show it: it's right there, on boot. It's actually just about the only thing the user CAN twiddle, if booting the default kernel doesn't work - the only bit where they feel they can influence the process. So, in my experience, that's what they do: they try a different menu entry. They don't actually _need_ the knowledge of what the hell they're doing. All they need is the knowledge that 'this is a menu with different entries and choosing one of the other ones might make something different happen'. Obviously this tweaking reflex can lead to disaster in _some_ cases, but in the case of recovering from a bad kernel, it actually serves people rather well. I agree with the kernel team that a better option would be some kind of smart recovery from failed boot, though. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
