Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the
kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob
causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I
can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working
version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive
while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see
why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just
perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional
but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means
but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're
dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they
can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu.
If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this
info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout.
If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of
what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle)
*Current Versions*
Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17)
*
Superceded Versions*
Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17)
Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17)
Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16)
*Other Operating Systems*
Microsoft Windows 7
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy to hear thoughts on this approach.
Kirk
On 06/20/2012 02:00 AM, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:40:38 -0700
Dan Mashal wrote:
> Again, I go with a "If it aint broke don't fix it" mentality into
> things.
>
> In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on
> RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14
> Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between
> each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
>
Yeah, it is annoying, but rejecting a change *only* because it is
change isn't a strong argument. With such reasoning there wouldn't be
PCs in the first place (and btw. steam engine also works, doesn't
it, yet trains are now using diesel, if they are not using
electricity)... Still I think the changes between Fedora/Red Hat
releases are small compared to differences between
Fedora/Debian/(Open)Suse or between various M$ operating systems... So
either deal with it or decrease the number of concurrently "supported"
releases to sane number.
You know, people who use Fedora (especially those that contribute) often
multi-boot and, frankly, menu like the following one (the kernel
versions are semi-random picks of sane numbers out of my head) isn't
exactly helpful:
* Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17)
* Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc17)
* Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc17)
* Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc16)
* Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc16)
* Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc16)
* CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.4-35.el5)
* CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.3-30.el5)
* CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.2-21.el5)
* Microsoft Windows
* Memtest
IMHO it is broken and always was (at the very least it always annoyed
the hell out of me that fedora release number wasn't present). But
still, currently it is more broken, because grub2-mkconfig writes
sub-menued items, while kernel rpm updates grub2 still using the above
method, which leads to combination of sub-menus and non-sub-menued
items...
Cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
design-team mailing list
design-team(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team