On Jan 31, 2008 1:39 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Arthur Pemberton wrote: > > >>> Got any examples of that? > >> Since this is Karl's thread, his problems with Nvidia and sound should > >> be famous by now and apply to any kernel modules. > > > > I don't receive Karl mail, sorry > > > >> But every fedora > >> version has required new patches to VMware that you have to track down, > > > > Wasn't aware of this. And you're saying that this is intentional by > > the Fedora dev team? > > Changes don't just happen by accident - someone has to make them. But you are implying that this is intentional. I think that's something you should at least backup if you're going to say it. > >> firewire has had about 50/50 odds of working, anything that knew device > >> names would break from one version to the next, > > > > While some Fedora devs may be kernel hackers, I doubt they are to > > blame for firewire support. > > Some issues were with the kernel, some with the layering of device > detection when the connection is made or at boot time. Regardless, > fedora doesn't have to ship a broken kernel just because it exists. Well if the vanilla kernel has this problem, blaming Fedora seems unreasonable. The general policy is to ship the kernel as vanilla as possible. > >> CIPE hasn't worked since > > > > Are you referring to this CIPE? > > http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-mini/Cipe+Masq.html I wasn't familiar > > with the term. > > Yes, once it was a fill-in-the-form VPN in the networking setup. Next > version it was gone with no options to support existing setups. I guess no one was interested in supporting it. I haven't heard of it before myself. > >> FC1... What other OS forces you to go though these contortions > >> continuously just to continue getting security fixes for the bugs it ships? > > > > You lost me there. I don't see how this fits with the rest of your > > post. where are getting security fixes (udpates) being related to > > using software that isn't build for Fedora on Fedora? > > I don't mind doing a substantial amount of work to install things that > weren't planned, but then I'd like it to keep working. You can't just > keep running fedora without putting your box (and everything else on the > network) at risk when the security updates stop. And then there is > almost no chance that you can just repeat your steps with the next > version since it will have a huge number of arbitrary changes, including > things that affect hardware compatibility. I guess your choice of software has a lot of incompatibilities inherent in it. I am normally up and running on a new Fedora install for my desktop pretty quickly. I normally spend way more time customizing the look and feel of my KDE install to my perfection. It seems that your combination of unsupported software is making things a lot tougher for you. However, I see no evidence that this is intentional on the Fedora teams part. Nor do I see how it would benefit them from exhausting energy into blocking things. -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com )
