Because you can never beat a dead horse enough... I'm going to chime in that the loss of the "Install Everything" button is a big loss for Fedora. Everyone I know who installs Fedora or RedHat (which is really only about 4-5 people) uses the "Install Everything" button, because _no_one_ gives a measly care about a few extra Gb of disk space, and nobody wants to spend time pecking around menus or hunting down software. It is a big waste of time. No, I don't want to have to load and run another program that can get me some other interface which I have to figure out to install everything. No I don't want to have to click every package group. No, I don't care if my auto updater has to download more fixes. I just want to click the "Install Everything" button and, no, I don't care if it doesn't really install _everything_. Almost everything is fine. And conflicts really aren't the problem. There are lots of packages now that aren't getting installed now that could be. I was surprised by all the "optional" packages that I had to select one at a time to get installed: old favorites like emacs(!), xmms, xfig, and great newer programs like k3b (which the fedora installation web page recommends for burning fedora CDs :). It is just not worth my time. Next time it will be SUSE instead. -Frank p.s. Inkscape should be in the distribution. It's the hot new thing. Very nice. Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 12:27:56PM +1030, Tim wrote: > >>Discussed to death here over the last few weeks. But in summary, >>"everything" never really installed "everything", and if you actually > > The point it took to click one checkbox to install a shitload of packages. > User attention is a scarce resource. > > Hard drive space and bandwidth is effectively free. Time is not. > >>did "install" *everything* you'd have conflicts up to your earholes, not > > Is "conflicts up to your earlobes" supposed to be a feature? > Why can't conflicts be autoresolved? Why are there conflicts in the > first place? > >>to mention masses of updates to manage. > > If I asked for it, and bandwidth is no issue, I don't see why this > is a problem. > > Please stop rationalizing deficits being features. They're not. > >
