On Thu, 2007-05-24 at 22:44 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> The only recurrent complaint about our bootloader is people who don't
> care about it are forced to pay attention due to our current use of
> flashy vga-16 background.
>
> This can be solved by bios-like black & white plain text camouflage.
>
> What additionnal purpose removing the grub text altogether or killing
> the grub timeout window serves, appart from making various user
> categories miserable? (We've already established some posters do not
> care about them overmuch. That's not a valid technical argument)
We're discussing defaults here. One camp wants to get rid of eye-sore
known as the boot loader screen because many end users don't or can't
use it [1]. The other camp wants it to stay.
A while back I had hoped that having different "spins" of Fedora (or, if
you want, "canned configurations") would allow for the different camps
to work on different spins. Anyway, for the server spin you'd default to
showing the bootloader screen; for the desktop (or dare I say "Fedora
for Human Beings" spin? [2]) spin you wouldn't show it.
It didn't work out this way for Fedora 7 though. I wonder if it still
makes sense.
David
[1] : and to some people, it makes a ton more sense to configure boot
options via a dedicated UI (e.g. s-c-bootloader) in the desktop session
because that's accessible (in the a11y sense), translatable, support
complex scripts / glyphs and reachable via VNC. Or whatever. Of course,
one should still be able to configure things in the boot loader.
[2] : just kidding
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
