On Sat, 2005-04-09 at 19:32, Craig White wrote:
> > Yes, but look back at the jump between 7.3 which was a real classic
> > in stability and probably still running in a lot of places (I have
> > a few myself) and 8.0 which was just horrible.
> ----
> you would no doubt accept that this is/was a matter of opinion and I for
> one, rather liked 8.0
Sure, but then I'd bet that you didn't try to run an apache/mod_perl
site on it as distributed.
> ----
> > Actually, I didn't expect it to be such a controversial issue.
> ----
> The controversy seems to center on the fact that you have no hesitance
> to suggesting that others go to great lengths to solve what you perceive
> as problems, but they - fedora-development has decided otherwise...and
> of course, you used this - the users forum to address what is clearly a
> topic better discussed in the development forum since it is they who
> make these decisions.
I thought some users might appreciate the alternative I mentioned,
which is that the k12ltsp distribution is rebuilt with the
updates available at the time it is released - which is
always a bit after each fedora release since the add-ons
need to be tested. (And since this is done by one man whose
real job is in school administration, I think that puts
an upper bound on the 'great lengths' that could be needed).
> ----
> > The only real problem for
> > me has been that for every version from RH9-FC2 I have one or more
> > kinds of machines that will not install due to hardware problems
> > (each machine will run one or more versions, but fails with at least
> > one - and oddly, most of them were purchased loaded with RH linux).
> > But, I'd rather switch than fight so I've been installing Centos 3.4
> > on all of those. I suspect though, that if the updates were backed
> > into the isos the install problems would have been fixed.
> ----
> There is perhaps one motherboard that FC-3 cannot install on. Now if you
> are talking about FC-2, yes, that is getting a bit long in the tooth now
> but it is going to fedora-legacy RSN.
I couldn't wait for FC3 to use the machines again - and there was no
convincing evidence at the time that it would be better than the
previous 3 versions. Actually, in deference to RH9, the problem machines
had SCSI controllers newer than the release and it was eventually
possible to make it work by adding a driver during the install.
The ones that failed with FC2, on the other hand, went hopelessly
into a loop during video detection early in the install.
--
Les Mikesell
les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
