<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)"> <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple> <div class=Section1> Okay, so I mostly love Fedora. However, here are 4 things that got by blood really, really boiling, so I thought I’d share my emotions. They are mostly policy issues, where I think you have gotten it very very wrong.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Just installed F11 64 bit, here are the things I hate about it in the first 30 minutes (of course there are a lot of things I like too, but they work, these don't). No doubt more will crop up.<o:p></o:p> <ul type=disc> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Root gdm login - gets harder every release - SHAME ON YOU root nazis!<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Samba (outbound) browsing requires firewall mods<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>Jamming SELinux enforcing mode with no query during install<o:p></o:p></li> </ul> And a bug:<o:p></o:p> <ul type=disc> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2'>My "supported" NVIDIA card (Quadro NVS 295) is not detected - okay this may not be due to overt, mulish arrogance, but I did check the supported card list and it is really annoying.<o:p></o:p></li> </ul> The first 3 items are just freaking absurd and represent some sort of political agenda combined with astonishing arrogance. Is a graphical root login dangerous -- of course! So are a lot of things, which have obvious enable/disable controls. Was this this discussed in the release note? - NO. Should it be inhibited by an ever-increasing set of obscure work-arounds (in this case an new file to edit in F11)? Of course not. (Well as was pointed out to me in thread <a href="http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=223793">http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=223793</a> this is discussed... but in non-highlighted text at the end of the boring last bullet suggesting you “save and close”).<o:p></o:p> And why on earth show the stupid "Windows Network" if it doesn't work -- just gives an obscure error message "Failed to retrieve share list from server". If you install the client, the reasonable man would open the ports, OR provide a cluefull error message. SELinux - enforcing???? So all the bugs are worked out? I think not.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> <div> Regards<o:p></o:p> -- Charlie Butterfield<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> P.S. Here is a bit more context:<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Bob -- Thanks for the tip, I did NOT realize the developers didn't scan the forums. I have been using Fedora since FC2 (I think), and overall think its great, esp as a bleeding edge incubator for RHEL/CentOS. BUT there are some annoying trends occurring that finally pushed me over rant/no-rant threshold. Dan -- I like all manner of stuff, but what caused me to just wipe my CentOS 5.3 root partition and replace it with F11 was a desire to get the relatively new GNOME gvfs stuff -- so I can manipulate remote windows shares with any tool, not just GnomeVFS aware tools. On a higher level I am amazed and impressed by the creative outpouring from the various Open Source communities, although it is also a stark reminder of the fact that programmers hate, hate, hate documentation :-)<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> </div> </div> <o:p> </o:p> </div> </body> </html>