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

Re: Which image for rawhide HD install???

On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Bill Crawford wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Brock Organ wrote:
> > We had too many variables with the old style.  Download each file
> > seperately and hope everything worked alright.  Also we had many people
>  I hope you'll both forgive me for butting in, but I really hope you
> will reconsider this, or at least allow both and then *recommend* that
> people download the ISO images.
>  On reason is that it's now inconsistent with the network install
> options, that all need an unpacked tree.  The other is that we could
> test the installer out of Raw Hide a bit more easily.

IMO, the consistency issue seems to be a matter of taste or preference.

It really comes down to the savings servicing bug reports of this type.
Issues in previous releases seemed to be almost always related to the
download process. By limiting it to ISOs with known md5sums, it has all
but eliminated expensive hard to reproduce bug reports during the
Fisher/Wolverine betas, and we have gained an important level one tool in
the process ("well, did you verify the md5sums of your download?") for
future reports.

But I do appreciate that it adds an extra step to test the installer out
of Rawhide ...


Brock Organ		QA Engineer		borgan redhat com
Red Hat, Inc. - 2600 Meridian Pkwy Durham, NC 27713 (USA)
 "That which we are, we are..."    "I `em what I`em!"
    -Alfred, Lord Tennyson            -Popeye, Lord Sailor

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