Re: The new installer

[Carl G <carlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chuck, I don't know what you're trying to say/achieve here...

2012/9/11 Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R <caf@xxxxxxxx>

On 09/11/2012 10:58 AM, David Lehman wrote:

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.

I am not showing pre-alpha Fedora to anyone.
I am not discussing it anywhere except on this list.
I am certainly not announcing anything on Distrowatch et al.

--
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

-- 
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test