On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Matej Cepl wrote:
> On 2008-03-07, 15:23 GMT, Arne Chr. Jorgensen wrote:
> > Spent 3 days with Fedora9-alpha on server and laptops - refuses
> > to run. There a plenty of bugs, but difficult for me to report
> > everything.
>
> a) Fedora 9alpha was in some departments really bad -- so
> immediately when you are somehow able to you should upgrade.
> Huge amount of fixes etc. went to Rawhide in meantime, so
> aside from making (hopefully) our system more working, it
> makes it also more relevant to the developers.
> b) Sorry, life is tough, but bugs filed here don’t count as such.
> There is no duty on developers to read this list and they
> would have to file bugs themselves anyway.
>
> Thanks a lot for all your effort!!!
i'm actually using f9alpha as my main system here, on an AMD-based
gateway laptop. so far, it's been working just fine. admittedly, i'm
not pushing the bounds of what i'm doing, and i'm backing up a little
more frequently than normal, but i've had no problems so far.
rday
p.s. well, ok, maybe the occasional update issue when the
dependencies are a bit borked, like now -- totem needed by
totem-nautliux-xine. but i'm starting to take that kind of thing in
stride.
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.
http://crashcourse.ca Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
========================================================================--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
