The new installer

[David Lehman]

On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 10:24 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> On 09/11/2012 08:07 AM, David Lehman wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 14:07 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> >> Had a frustrating experience with the fat cow installer.
> >> Something in one of the selections I made had a
> >> missing dependency (or whatever).  Missing dependencies
> >> are a part of developmental installs.
> >>
> >> What was most frustrating is that the installer did not
> >> indicate which selection was causing the problem.  I
> >> had to go into whack-a-mole mode, repeatedly removing
> >> selections and retrying until the offending package was
> >> removed.
> > If you cannot tolerate an alpha installer, try _not_ tempting fate by
> > doing a simple, minimal install. That means automatic partitioning
> > (expect us to wipe the disks you select) and a minimal package set. Once
> > you're out of the horrible installer you can customize to your heart's
> > content.
> >
> >> There are so many things wrong with this bagbiter installer.
> >> Why can't Fedora use the Fedora 16 installer, which was
> >> relatively friendly and much more useful.
> > You can always use yum to update from one release to the next.
> >
> > I know it can be frustrating, but if you want to run alpha releases of a
> > by-definition bleeding-edge distribution, that means things change. Not
> > just the things you personally want changed.
> >
> >> What was so wrong with the working installer that required
> >> writing a new one from scratch?
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R     caf at omen.com   www.omen.com
> >> Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications
> >>     Omen Technology Inc      "The High Reliability Software"
> >> 10255 NW Old Cornelius Pass Portland OR 97231   503-614-0430
> >>
> >
> In my experience using Yum to update to a new release has
> resulted in a defective system.  And there is always the
> possibility that hardware failures may oblige me to make
> a fresh install.  A processor upgrade usually demands a
> fresh install.

As I said before, the alpha can be installed if you keep the tweaking to
a minimum during installation.

> 
> Then there is a question of prominently showing substandard
> software to the public.  We all know about first impressions
> in social settings.  In operating systems it is the installer that
> makes the first impressions.

If you're showing people a (pre-)Alpha as their first impression of
Fedora then the blame for that poor judgment lies with you.