Rename anaconda to cryptoconda?

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 18:13 -0500, Eric Blake wrote:

>  But after that install, when I switched over to the F18 Beta
> installer, I could not get things to work - anaconda just crashed on me.
> I finally resorted to installing another copy of F17 and using fedup to
> convert it to F18.

Well, the crash is clearly simply a bug, not a design flaw.

> It took me at least 15 minutes to understand enough of the F18 custom
> partitioning screen to even figure out what I was doing to request mount
> points for my new install; among other things, I didn't realize that
> there were no other OS's shown until I decrypted the LUKS container (as
> the probing of /etc/fstab couldn't proceed until it could read the lvm
> partitions).  

This is a design issue, though it might need to be more specifically
stated to start to figure out what to do about it. I haven't looked at
exactly how this case looks in a while...

> This is the bug
> report that ABRT created for me:
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882722

Thanks, I'm sure the devs will look at it.

> Another usability bug I did not see mentioned here - in the custom screen,
> there is no way to have multiple OSs expanded at once.  Every time I clicked
> the small '+' button next to one OS to see what partitions were still
> assigned there, any other open OS was collapsed.  I wish there were a
> top-level expand-all button, or at least the abilty to leave more than
> one OS expanded at a time, rather than being forced to collapse one OS
> when switching to view another; I have not yet filed a usability bug
> for this UI aspect.

I think this is by-design rather than being a bug, but I don't know what
the rationale is. My proposed three-pane design, at least as I drew it,
has the 'new install' group expanded permanently, which may help.

> I will say that the anaconda in updates-testing was marginally better than
> the one that shipped with the beta image; among other things, instead of
> just showing two pieces of information per mount point (mount directory and
> generic description such as 'root'), it showed three (mount directory,
> generic description, and hardware name such as '/dev/sda5' or
> 'lv_root_fedora18' that I had already named when pre-creating the volume
> group), and that made a world of difference in understanding what I was
> doing, providing the confirmation I needed that I was designating the
> correct portion of the disk for the proposed mount point.

Yeah, that was planned for a while but missed the Beta freeze.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net