Good bye

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Jan 31, 2008 1:39 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> 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 )