Hmn. Where to start?
Okay -- I like that MandrakeSoft took the step of going to an all graphical
install. I've heard people rave about it and I've seen the screenshots,
which are nice (though I myself haven't taken the step of moving up) -- but
I have a few concerns about what I've been reading here on the list.
One, it would appear to me that we have a gang of Linux users who have been
bitten by the Micro$oft "upgraditis" bug. I remember a day when you
installed software, and when it worked, you left it the way it was. Since
M$ Windows (hell, even before that) came along, people feel compelled to
upgrade, even if they can find no obvious reason to do it other than to
have "the latest and greatest."
So, my first question is, if 6.x worked so well, why on earth are you
upgrading? I've got two machines in my office running beautifully on 6.1,
and I see no good reason to move to 7.0.
I think this is an especially pertinent question since we are dealing with
Unix, which gives the administrator/user tremendous flexibility in deciding
what will and won't go into their system. If you need features, add them!
Two, there is the question of "upgrades" versus "clean installs." I haven't
heard nearly as many complaints about 7.0 from people who performed clean
installs. Certainly, Linux is very sensitive to dependencies and my
estimation is that the risk of something failing is much greater when you
upgrade. For my part, I *tried* to upgrade from 6.0 to 6.1, and it was an
unmitigated disaster. I even had basic filesystem problems. Only a clean
install resolved them.
So, I recommend two approaches: if you need to stay current, replace
packages and binaries, and if necessary, get a new kernel package. When you
run out of rope to do this, then it's time to start clean, but by the time
that is necessary, it will be worth it.
Trevor Farrell wrote:
> Today, I feel differently. We have had a Mdk 6 machine at work for
> some time, and its supervisor today decided to install 7.0-2 . He
> started by booting from a boot floppy, the install locked when it tried
> to initialize the CD. So I suggested that he set the BIOS to boot from
> CD (it was previously set to boot from the floppy, then the ide drive.)
> and this time the install went nicely, until he hit the expert select
> packages fiasco - he couldn't make any more sense of it than I could -
> so he cancelled that and started again, this time being careful not to
> select expert! It loaded the packages (why is Mandrake so slow doing
> this, compared to red hat?) and then locked up as it started the X
> configuration. Rebooted the machine, everything started up well, but no
> X. At this stage my colleague threw the ver 7 cd in the bin, and will be
> putting 6 back on the machine next week. (No - he doesn't want to know
> how to fix it, or what went wrong.)
>
> Also today, I installed the BeOS 5 (Personal Edition) operating system
> that I downloaded last night. It really just unpacked the files. I
> rebooted the machine, and hey! presto ... BeOS! Funny, video worked,
> sound worked, Cdrw burnt cd's, ... all with NO installation questions,
> NO how-to's, No hassles. OK - so there is nothing written for BeOS yet,
> and I'm not serious about keeping it, just curious, BUT, it proved you
> can write a hassle free installer THAT WORKS!
>
> OK - back to Linux - the current attitude that if something didn't work,
> it's because you didn't read the instructions or your hardware is faulty
> IS SIMPLY NOT ACCEPTABLE to me any more - If it doesn't work FIRST TIME
> it's because its broken, and needs fixing.
I don't know where you see this attitude -- there are plenty of people
working on Linux sources who would agree with you that it's not acceptable,
but remember that many of them are volunteering their time. There are
thousands of varieties of PC hardware out there, I think it's remarkable
that so much *does* work (and this whether we're talking about M$ Windows,
BeOS, or Linux). Think about it -- imagine someone gave you the task of
developing a platform for the PC! I sure wouldn't want the job. I'd work my
butt off and still have people whining to me on a regular basis, "My
Shizbat 6500 doesn't work, you prick!"
Again -- if 6.x worked, then stick with it.
> The first Linux distribution that produces a hassle free installer that
> works (no if's, but's, or maybe's - I mean works - full stop!)
> WILL SUCCEED, all the rest will only be installed by enthusiasts (which
> I still count myself among) and are doomed to their rightful resting
> place in the garbage bin.
Anyway, on a basic level I don't disagree with you. It's important to be
demanding and play the devil's advocate -- because that *is* the path to
success.
> Now, it's time for my big decision - Do I, like my colleague, consign
> the Ver 7 install I have spent so much time on to oblivion, and go back
> to Ver 6 because it worked, or do I persevere, and try to get 7 up and
> running properly, or, perhaps, do I try RedHat 6.2, or just wait for a
> distro with kernel 2.4 & XFree 4? I really don't know, and I really
> don't expect anyone else to decide for me, I just know that my
> perceptions of install problems will never be the same again.
I don't know -- if you are really an enthusiast, may I suggest something?
Yes, try and make your Mandrake 7.0 install work. Then, when you have it
figured out, give something back to the community and pass on to the rest
of us what you did (and hell, even MandrakeSoft). *That* is how you effect
change. If you're not part of the solution...
-Stephen-
