On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 14:07 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: > Had a frustrating experience with the fat cow installer. > Something in one of the selections I made had a > missing dependency (or whatever). Missing dependencies > are a part of developmental installs. > > What was most frustrating is that the installer did not > indicate which selection was causing the problem. I > had to go into whack-a-mole mode, repeatedly removing > selections and retrying until the offending package was > removed. If you cannot tolerate an alpha installer, try _not_ tempting fate by doing a simple, minimal install. That means automatic partitioning (expect us to wipe the disks you select) and a minimal package set. Once you're out of the horrible installer you can customize to your heart's content. > > There are so many things wrong with this bagbiter installer. > Why can't Fedora use the Fedora 16 installer, which was > relatively friendly and much more useful. You can always use yum to update from one release to the next. I know it can be frustrating, but if you want to run alpha releases of a by-definition bleeding-edge distribution, that means things change. Not just the things you personally want changed. > > What was so wrong with the working installer that required > writing a new one from scratch? > > -- > Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R caf@xxxxxxxx www.omen.com > Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications > Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software" > 10255 NW Old Cornelius Pass Portland OR 97231 503-614-0430 > -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
