[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: FC2 doubtful quality?



On Tuesday 22 June 2004 07:35, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Dexter Ang wrote:
> > HaJo Schatz wrote:
> >> Hi List,
> >>
> >> Long story, short question: Should I fall back to FC1 instead of using
> >> FC2? I am somewhat very concerned about the release quality of FC2.
> >> Here's what happened:
> >
> > It is all your choice. No one is forcing you to use FC2.
>
>     to those folks who habitually respond to critisicm of FC 1/2 with this
> annoying, circle-the-wagons, defensive mentality, a piece of advice: grow
> up.
>
>     when someone takes the time to document a number of legitimate concerns
> and obvious flaws in an *official* release (after three, count 'em,
> *three* test releases), and also legitimately asks whether he should be
> concerned about its quality, he deserves a better and more mature answer
> than "No one is forcing you to use FC2."
>
>     it's become really tedious to watch the growing trend of promoting
> fedora core, talking about making it just a terrific distro, how it has a
> dynamic user community behind it ... yadda yadda yadda ... but whenever
> someone posts perfectly reasonable criticism of some aspect, there's a
> sudden surge of, "hey, if you don't like it, don't use it, ok?"  i suspect
> it's not the quality of FC2 that might drive people off, it's the
> closed-minded and dismissive attitude of its alleged supporters.
>
> >> - Service PCMCIA doesn't load the yento-sockets module. This is known @
> >> bugzilla, one has to patch the pcmcia script by hand. Through this bug,
> >> the PCMCIA subsystem is non-functional!
> >
> > This seems to be system specific. My IBM Thinkpad T30's PCMCIA works
> > without any problems.
>
>     well, good for you.  and the fact that it works for you means ... what?
> that it doesn't qualify as a real problem?  fact is, the
> /etc/init.d/pcmcia file has historically been a bit of a mess -- heck, i
> recall submitting a bug report on that file as far back as april of 2003:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
>
> it's depressing that it's still broken, and in such a blatant way.
>
> >> - My console-beep (emitted through the sound card) disappeared ever
> >> since FC2. I don't seem to be able to find a pointer on how to trace
> >> this...
> >
> > You must load the pcspkr module. It's been discussed and is in the
> > archives.
>
> which doesn't dismiss the original poster's contention that it's still a
> mildly-annoying bug, and one which didn't exist in FC1.  i don't think
> it's unreasonable for folks to gripe when things which once worked in FC1
> suddenly stopped working in FC2.
>
> >> This is the result after a few hours of FC2 experience and I really
> >> start wondering about what level of testing this release experienced
> >> before being released into the public -- even IMHO obvious things like
> >> the PCMCIA subsystem doesn't work! Seems to me that FC1 was by far the
> >> more reliable system.
> >
> > Realibility will depend on the number of people testing "test" releases.
> > If you want a quality release, you should help out by testing and
> > reporting bugs.
>
> oh, man, you *so* did not want to go there.  working from memory here so i
> hope i'm remembering correctly, i'm pretty sure there have been at least a
> couple folks who pointed out that they *did* put in time running the test
> releases, that they *did* identify and report obvious bugs way back when
> and yet, when FC2 hit the streets, those bugs were still there.
>
> under the circumstances, then, it's pretty offensive to get testy with
> folks about how they should get involved in the testing process when many
> of them have done exactly that, only to see their efforts at bug
> identification and reporting make no difference in the final release. one
> might conclude that, under those circumstances, they really do have the
> right to wonder if it was worth the time and effort.
>
> > If you can't afford to use your machine for testing, your best hope is
> > to report bugs and wait for fixes.
>
> see above.
>
> > Again, no one's forcing you to use FC2.
>
> and again, this is a really childish response.  one has to wonder, just
> what do you do for a living?  i can just imagine, say, a car salesman with
> this kind of "don't you dare criticize me and my product" attitude:
>
> Salesman: "Yes, sir, Mr. Smith, this van has the horsepower you need for
> pulling your boat, loads of cargo space and foldout seats for the kids,
> optional 6-way sound system since you like music."
>
> Mr. Smith: "Yup, it's almost perfect, but I'm not sure if my current roof
> rack is compatible with the roof mounts ..."
>
> Salesman: "HEY!  No one's *forcing* you to buy this thing, OK?  You got a
> problem with it?!  There's lots of other dealers out there, all right?!"
>
> > Obviously you have the time to format and install an entirely new system
> > without assessing the possible issues first, so why not try SuSE?
>
> hey, good idea, dude.  there's nothing that placates an unsatisfied user
> more than suggesting they take their talents elsewhere.  *that'll* help
> the cause, fer shure.
>
> > Giving up on FC2 is really your decision. Either help out, by living
> > through bugs and reporting them, or just switch to something that works.
>
> once again, see above.  ("... or just switch to something that works."
> now *there's* some great testimonial.)
>
> > I am hoping that through my and others' efforts, FC3 will be a superb
> > release.
>
> and if it isn't, well, those whiners can take their complaints elsewhere,
> can't they?
>
> rday

Excellent post! I also have been noticing the elitist, unhelpful and downright 
rude replies to people who have legitament questions.  I just hope that 
people in general will lighten up and remember that manners certainly go a 
long way especially in perception of a forum such as this.

Phil Savoie



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]