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

Re: fc5: install everything?



On Fri March 31 2006 2:43 am, Paul Howarth wrote:
> But that's not what happened and it caused a real problem for
> the "Everything" installers.

Hate to disagree and/or jump back into this discussion, but I just don't buy 
this oft-repeated argument. I did many 'everything installs', and I 
encountered this issue with a small number of packages, and I remember them 
well. It gave me a reason to research those packages, find out something 
about them, and when I saw that they were not needed for my particular 
system, I just removed them. 

And I learned something, not just about the particular package, either, but 
broader knowledge about dependency problems and such...which has everything 
to do with why I liked the everything install.

And now, I've gotten used to the new way, and it's OK, too - I think the 
detractors who talk about thousands of clicks are equally wrong, btw... After 
doing multiple FC5 installs, using the right-click method, I can get through 
the package lists in under 5 minutes, and there are many things I leave out, 
now that I've learned a bit about Linux. 

But, the oft repeated argument that those pesky packages that wouldn't get 
updated caused "real problems" for us, I think is a red herring. Problems are 
always opportunities - solving them increases one's knowledge. I also 
remember trying some smaller installs and also having problems. Things that 
wouldn't work, and packages missing whose name you didn't know, and spending 
much time tracking such issues down - so, it can cut both ways...

But, this argument, I'm sure, will go on and on -- too bad, because, the 
matter has been settled - to paraphrase W. Churchill, using up the present to 
argue about the past is a good way to shortchange the future...
-- 
Claude Jones
Bluemont, VA, USA


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