FC5T2 ready for even a test release?
Rahul Sundaram
sundaram at redhat.com
Mon Jan 23 00:09:13 UTC 2006
Hi
>
>note well that what that point shows is that an everything install may
>not have as compelling reason for *existence* as it once did, and i'm
>certainly willing to grant that. but it most certainly does *not* show
>that it has a "cost." there's a difference.
>
>
Of course it does. How many users have you supported that end dealing
with the GFS kernel module issue in FC4 just because they did a
everything installation and had no clue what GFS mean and wouldnt have
installed had it not the installation supported a everything
installation?. I remember dealing with in #fedora, fedora list. fedora
forum and in person atleast three dozen times. In every single instance
that I was able to discuss this in detail with them they agreed they
were doing it out of ignorance about the issues involved.
>more to the point, it cannot *possibly* have an associated "cost"
>since you can emulate it simply by selecting all of the check boxes on
>the screen.
>
>
You are working around something that shouldnt be really required for
end users at all who wouldnt use kickstart, yum or pirut.
>i have no problem with people arguing against an "everything" install.
>but, please -- don't make up bogus arguments to bolster your case.
>
>
Please make your case *in support of it* more just that you want it
without providing any good reasons. I have asked for it so many times
already
>in any event, there may be reasons why an "everything" install isn't
>as important a feature as it once was. but it doesn't appear to have
>an actual "cost" associated with it, and it clearly doesn't do any
>actual harm. so let's not make those arguments, ok?
>
>
It has so many manageability, performance and potential security issues
with packages they wouldnt be using. Did you actually read my entire
rationale against it?
--
Rahul
Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list