Fedora 12 Alpha installation test invitation --Jul 29, 2009

[David Boles]

On 8/9/2009 1:14 PM, Liam wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> To reflect the recent changes in Fedora from i386 to i586 and from i586
>> to i686 should not the name of the 32bit ISOs be:
>>
>> Fedora-12-Alpha-i686-DVD.iso instead of 'i386'?
>>
>> Or perhaps even better. Since the 64 bit DVD ISO is named:
>>
>> Fedora-12-Alpha-x86_64-DVD.iso
>>
>> Fedora-12-Alpha-x86-DVD.iso be the name of the 32bit ISO ?
>>
>> And as well as for the CD ISOs?
>>
>> And the final Fedora 12 release ISOs?
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>
> 
> This question has been discussed before,please refer to this mail:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-April/msg00346.html
> 
> or search "i686" in this page to see other comments:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-April/date.html


I understand the differences between i386, i586, and i686 processors.
Some 32bit people that I try to convince to switch to Fedora do not
understand that ISOs and RPM packages with 'i386' in their name are
modern and not meant for 13 year old computers.

I was thinking that names such as:

'Fedora-12-x86-DVD.iso'  instead of  'Fedora-12-i386-DVD.iso'  and
'Fedora-12-x86_64-DVD.iso'

look more modern and up-to-date. reflecting the contents od the ISOs and
packages.

Fedora is a great product. I appreciate you efforts and your work. And I
congratulate all of you that work to produce it.

So name them as you wish. Which I am sure that you will do.  :-)

Have a good day.
-- 


  David

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/attachments/20090807/270f559b/attachment.sig>