Fedora Core: initial encounter (RH doesn't like my machine??)

[Elton Woo]

As with Severn beta1 (RH 9.0.93), Fedora Core (RH 9.0.94)
did not install until after three attempts. Previous betas (wolverine,
etc) always installed on the first attempt.

Download ISO's:

Bittorrent was *disappointingly slooooow*. I could have latched 
on to a mirror and gotten the three CD's much faster using
mozilla.

Run md5sums, ISO's check out OK, burnt 'em with K3b.
Burn successful _no error_ messages whatever.

Boot, check media = OK, proceed ... and THEN --->

With Fedora, my first install resulted in a kernel oops (evinced
by my flashing keyboard lights. Because it refused to create
the boot disk (two previously used 1.44M diskettes in my
LS-120 drive aka /dev/hdb).

Second try: "Install Everything": "error installing ncurses 5.3.9
... you may have insufficient space [on a 20 Gb drive!!!??] or
this might indicate a hardware defect" ... hmm, maybe my]
Quantum is failing?

Third try: "Custom" ... <*WHEW*>!!! finally, success!

Old or previous bugs resurface:
1. Install "all packages" fails, as before:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101078

2. In KDE, the Start Here folder is a "malformed URL"

2. My beloved RFE is still a RFE. I had to configure the scanner.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80613
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101078

3. After installing, redhat-configure-packages, keeps insisting
on "install disk". Install only works from the console window
or by clicking on the icons in the nautilus CD window.

4. Autologin dialog "unreadable"
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101511

5. Kmail still misbehaves:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102532

6. Since the Start Here is malformed in KDE, I can't add 
startup programs.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102533

Graphical boot is indeed faster. Should I remove sendmail
to speed up things?
During installation, I'm pretty sure I saw something mentioned
about a joystick configuration applet, but I find no such
item.

Elton

-- 
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_4504.html
"You only live once: let's make life BETTER for each other."
LINUX User #193975 [AMD ATHLON CPU] ICQ #149608718.

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 01:01, Elton Woo wrote:
>  Bittorrent was *disappointingly slooooow*. I could have latched 
>  on to a mirror and gotten the three CD's much faster using
>  mozilla.
>   
You use *Mozilla* instead of a proper FTP client or a downloader like
wget to download ISOs? Wow. You must have a really reliable connection
:)

Regards,

Michel

[Elton Woo]

On September 28, 2003 10:52 am, Michel Alexandre Salim <Michel Alexandre Salim 
<salimma1(a)yahoo.co.uk&gt;&gt; wrote:
>  On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 01:01, Elton Woo wrote:
>  > Bittorrent was *disappointingly slooooow*. I could have latched
>  > on to a mirror and gotten the three CD's much faster using
>  > mozilla.
>
>  You use *Mozilla* instead of a proper FTP client or a downloader like
>  wget to download ISOs? Wow. You must have a really reliable connection
>  
I'm on cable, and in addition, I usually pick one of the European or
Far East sites when the ones in the West are busy. With moz, I'd have
gotten all three CD's within (at most) 3 1/2 hours, compared to about 
5 hours with Bittorrent (ver 3.2).

Elton ;-)

-- 
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_4504.html
"You only live once: let's make life BETTER for each other."
LINUX User #193975 [AMD ATHLON CPU] ICQ #149608718.

[John Thacker]

On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 11:54:29AM -0400, Elton Woo wrote:
>  On September 28, 2003 10:52 am, Michel Alexandre Salim <Michel
> Alexandre Salim 
>  <salimma1(a)yahoo.co.uk&gt;&gt; wrote:
>  > On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 01:01, Elton Woo wrote:
>  > > Bittorrent was *disappointingly slooooow*. I could have latched
>  > > on to a mirror and gotten the three CD's much faster using
>  > > mozilla.
>  >
>  > You use *Mozilla* instead of a proper FTP client or a downloader like
>  > wget to download ISOs? Wow. You must have a really reliable connection
>  >
>  
>  I'm on cable, and in addition, I usually pick one of the European or
>  Far East sites when the ones in the West are busy. With moz, I'd have
>  gotten all three CD's within (at most) 3 1/2 hours, compared to about 
>  5 hours with Bittorrent (ver 3.2). 
For me, Bittorrent was much, much faster.  I got all three CDs within
45 minutes, compared to an average of 3 hours or so with FTP.  And with
FTP the mirrors are sometimes full.

Ah, cable.  So no doubt your upload speeds are much worse than your
download speeds, yes?  Bittorrent's algorithm effectively penalizes
your download speed for that, since your download speed ends up being
proportional to your upload speed in the end.  The computers with very fast 
upload speeds won't want to share with yours that much, since they can't
download from you that quickly, AIUI.

BitTorrent is much closer to Pareto optimal overall, though.  The process 
would be eased the more mirror sites (and completed downloads) stayed 
connected to be used as seeds for everyone.

John Thacker