On 3/11/07, Lamont Peterson <lamont@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sunday 11 March 2007 12:20pm, Gianluca Sforna wrote: > On 3/11/07, Baris Cicek <baris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > After that point installation start writing to disk. Before that > > everything is happening without any change on the hdd. > > > > It's a good pointer for user that after that moment s/he is starting to > > change his partitions. AFAIK, after this point anaconda do formatting of > > the partitions. One last click won't annoy user much, but losing whole > > partitions might. > > It would not annoy the user _IF_ the depsolving step was faster. > > I think this is the reason why I saw mails in the past with the same > request: a fairly long step (depsolving) followed by another long step > (actual installation) sounds naturally like they should be merged. > > IIRC the reason for this is that the depsolving phase could fail > depending on the package selection and the selected repos; I still > fail to see whay the last "Next" could not be skipped automatically > when no such problem arise though... In that case, the "After clicking 'Next' your partitions will be altered" thing will need to be mentioned before depsolving. If depsolve fails, then bounce back to the package select screen with a (hopefully) useful error message.
+1
Of course, if my suggestion of how to implement this change were adopted, then when depsolving does fail, experienced users/admins might be frustrated that they walked away thinking there wasn't going to be any more interaction and it should have installed when they come back and see an error message. Then again, that's always true.
If there is an error in the depsolving phase I don't see any difference from the current situation: you should go back and fix what went wrong. The only difference is when no problems arise from depsolving, that is, no more interactions are needed -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
