On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 10:24 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: > On 09/11/2012 08:07 AM, David Lehman wrote: > > 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 > >> > > > In my experience using Yum to update to a new release has > resulted in a defective system. And there is always the > possibility that hardware failures may oblige me to make > a fresh install. A processor upgrade usually demands a > fresh install. As I said before, the alpha can be installed if you keep the tweaking to a minimum during installation. > > Then there is a question of prominently showing substandard > software to the public. We all know about first impressions > in social settings. In operating systems it is the installer that > makes the first impressions. If you're showing people a (pre-)Alpha as their first impression of Fedora then the blame for that poor judgment lies with you. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
