[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: WTF? Inaccessible bug reports?
- From: "Christopher Brown" <snecklifter gmail com>
- To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <fedora-devel-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: WTF? Inaccessible bug reports?
- Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:24:38 +0000
On 20/11/2007, Olivier Galibert <galibert pobox com> wrote:
> [Sent it personally instead of to the list by mistake]
See, people make mistakes!
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 06:06:54PM +0100, Lubomir Kundrak wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 15:51 +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 08:26:47AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > Perhaps you should calm down a bit. Flying off the handle before
> > > > asking if the bug permissions can be changed or an explanation is
> > > > provided is probably not going to be very productive.
> > >
> > > Well, sorry. Fedora becomes worse for my use with each release I try,
> > > and I'm starting to get really annoyed at that, because it used to be
> > > so much better.
> > May I ask what's "your use"?
> My use is a team in a lab with 100-200 machines, about 30 of them
> physically on people's desktops, about 80 in two oscar clusters. Some
> of the people could do system administration, some couldn't, most
> don't want to anyway.
I don't blame them with this kind of attitude hanging around.
> Since I ended up as sysadmin-by-default, I need a distribution which I
> can install and update with a minimum amount of fussing, and where the
> installation has pretty much everything the users are going to need.
Dude, you're using Fedora? Seriously, I love it but I wouldn't deploy
it large scale. Thats what RHEL or CentOS is for.
> At fedora core 3 times, things were reasonably nice. You could do an
> everything install, test it for a while to see what was missing and/or
> broken, put the packages and the additionally needed ones in a local
> network repository and go. And you would be ok for two years.
> At fedora core 5 times, Everything was lost. Thankfully it is still
> in kickstart, but it makes the initial testing phase more annoying.
> Way more problematic is the support time which went down to one year.
> At fedora 7 time, Core was mostly lost. There is still the list of
> package on the DVD as a guideline though, but there isn't a separate
> updates directory you can easily merge in anymore. To the point that
> I didn't find the time to do the new installation before 8 was out.
> Now we're at 8 and I want to try to move to it, but static ip support
> is fucked, and the list of packages on the DVD doesn't even have tcsh,
> which 50% of the people here use. Installing from the DVD by checking
> all 3 options at the top level doesn't even give you make or gcc,
> which is kind of annoying when the reason for installing interactively
> in the first place is to have everything needed to hack on anaconda to
> fix the static ip issue. An yum install '*' conflicts all the way due
> to the multilib crap.
You are insance if you think a "yum install *" will work. Section 8.
Certifiable. As for tcsh that is what kickstart is for as well as make
> And that's before anybody has even started to *use* the distribution.
> Fedora makes me think of E.R., at times. In the first seasons the
> show was about the hospital, and found its public. Then they seem to
> have decided try to extend its viewership by adding a lot on
> interpersonal relationships to the point of forgetting the hospital
> part. The old public left, not having what they wanted anymore, and
> the potential new one stayed with Gray's Anatomy, which does
> relationships much better. And the viewership is crashing down.
And you're the patient with hypochondria.
> Fedora was originally nice for people coming from an Unix background,
> where 50% of the windows on the screen are xterms. It seems to have
> collectively decided that it should instead cater to the Windows kind
> of people, to the detriment of the Unix ones. A default installation
> does not have a compiler. Everything looking slightly technical is
> hidden as much as possible. Easily understandable and editable text
> configuration files are routinely replaced by an obfuscated xml-based
> registry with automatically generated GUIs from hell. Basic
> things like static ips and routes are considered legacy and their
> support totally untested and/or considered unimportant. And
> significantly every comparison is done with Ubuntu, the epitome of the
> windowsian-come-here distributions, and never with Debian or Gentoo.
> Keep cranking up the pain, guys, and fedora will definitively makes
> its place in the "master of none" category.
Keep on bitching and being rude on devel and I'll use my coffee break
to write these helpful replies.
> It's kinda sad that people who do such a good job upstream end up
> building such a crappier-over-time distribution from it.
Gee thanks, I'm searching for things you've done to help but am scratching.
>  gconf I'm looking at you
and I bet its _scared_...
>  The only thing worse than a GUI designed by a computer scientist
> is a GUI automatically generated from a format description.
Fair enough. Scrap those silly GUI's and lets start again. But no
pesky computer scientists this time!
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]