On Wed, 26 May 2004 11:59:50 -0400 Gordon Keehn <gordonkeehn@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I did test. I didn't run into any problems because I installed on a > small box that I use exclusively for such matters. I do not install > beta software (and especially beta operating systems) on my primary > machine (dual-boot FC1 and Win2K), nor do I intend to install FC2 on my > primary machine at this time. In fact I don't intend to install FC2 > anywhere, at any time. So, not only did my (albeit limited) testing of > FC2 fail to turn up anything significant, but the perceived attitude > that a) it's my fault if I didn't turn up a problem during test, and b) > if I do run into problems later it's also my fault, has insured that I > won't be running any future Fedora drivers. But since I have limited > resources for testing, and just enough technical skills to be dangerous, > that shouldn't matter to the likes of Sean. It's not your fault, but it is understandable given the constraints on this project. We do need more testers who can test situation they care about like dual boot. Although next time it will be something else. There is a time-based release cycle and obviously not enough testers ran into this problem to raise it to more prominence or to find a pre-release solution. The solution wasn't known until after the release when it was finally tested on an affected dual boot system by someone with enough technical skill to figure out the solution. > BTW when MS service packs had a reputation for causing more problems > than they fixed, users avoided service packs. As did I. If Fedora Core > gets a reputation for trashing existing installations, users will avoid > Fedora Core, and the fact that this problem appears to have been KNOWN > earlier, and still wasn't fixed in the final driver, won't help. It's not all that bad, there's a pretty easy after-the-fact fix if the problem happens to bite you. Not ideal, but no data is trashed. Cheers, Sean
