+1 Personally I love your points.
John via Cell Phone -----????----- ???: "David Orman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ???: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ??: "Rob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [email protected] ????: 08-7-4 21:33 ??: Re: [indiana-discuss] new ISO soon? I suppose I just don't see the point in arguing against doing something that helps people, especially if it isn't a large undertaking. There are a lot of people out there who I convince to try OSOL, and often they come back mentioning bugs/not being able to install due to bugs that have already been fixed. First impressions are everything. Hardware support alone is one area where a new ISO would be helpful with. Additionally, things like the broken updates that occur when going from the initial release to snv_91 (related to grub) if you didn't read the release notes are absolute deal breakers for people new to OSOL. Things like this, that have already been resolved, are absolute necessities in the OS (not updating an OS isn't an option, neither is expecting "normal" users to dig through release notes just to do an update.) The argument that because you haven't encountered any issues there shouldn't be a new ISO spun seems a bit absurd. You're not exactly a typical user, you're a _bit_ (underlined for understatement) more familiar with how things work. If you give an average person the current 2008.5 cd, would you wager they'd successfully be able to install it on their hardware, update it to the most recent release, and perform all other necessary/wise things? Until we get to that point, I think ISO builds would be wise. Once we're at that level of usability, more infrequent ISO builds would likely suffice. They key is getting the initial install to the point it's completely usable, and capable of handling upgrades to newer versions seamlessly, without having background in the OS already. Then again, this is all *my* opinion. :) Take it as you will! Cheers, David On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Rob > >> so .. why drop another ISO if the process works as > >> expected ? > >> > > > > 1. it's nice to not have to install 1gb of updates on each test system we > install > > 2. we install onto dell servers, which currently requires the manual > install of the mega_lsi driver... which is now included with >snv90 > > 3. if a new user installs 2008.5, IPS is fairly broken- main bugs that > i'm aware of are: > > * no local package cache > > * does not handle repo timeouts cleanly > > * installs packages that don't belong to current snv release, e.g., if i > install 2008.5, then do pkg install SUNWapache (without first installing the > new ips...) it will install SUNWapache from snv91 > > > > I'm sure there are some other ips bugs... but these are pretty serious > deal killers for new users > > Well, gee, I think that you have some valid points there but I have > not hit any of those problems myself. I am sure that there are other > users out there that silently just install it and then move forwards. > I am one of the noisey types. Everything is working here for me .. so > I guess I'm happy and I say "don't fix there .. it works" when I am > merely one little noisey data point. > > Perhaps efforts need to be placed on making the ISO smaller and > smaller such that some sort of micro installer exists that does > nothing but provide a text installer and a whack of device drivers. > Thta means that the new user could download some itty bitty thing, say > 100MB or so, and then install everything from that. > > am I thinking in the wrong direction here ? > > Dennis > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
