

Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18

On Sun, 2004-05-16 at 18:17, Confushion wrote:
> Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> >   And the sky is falling, too.  These threads are getting old.  
> I would say the sky is falling for the user when their previously
> working Windows XP partition as completely unbootable.  I have not seen
> any fix short of wiping the partition table and losing the existing
> Windows XP partition.  Yes, the sky is falling for that user.  It's not
> just one or two people here, and it will be a significant number when
> the release goes live, if it has not been fixed.


  Regardless...repartitioning on a live, critical (in terms of data)
system is historically a hugely risky operation, not for the faint of
heart.  The situation may have improved a bit, it's not something I
would recommend to the 'masses'.

> If Microsoft released an upgrade for Windows that broke Linux
> installations in the same way, I think we know what the reaction would
> be.  Why shouldn't we strive to at least be better than Microsoft?

  Hmm, like Windows 98?  Windows OS installers are *extremely*
unfriendly to any non-Microsoft OS installed and will happily replace
the boot block with it's own without any regard to what's already there.

> I guess we disagree there.  I see your viewpoint as being very elitist
> and short-sighted.  There are lots of reasons why a person would want to
> be able to boot both Windows XP and FC2 on a single box.  

  You are free to disagree, but calling it elitist or short-sighted is
uncalled for.  Our views are just different.  Full stop.  Ask any IT
manager if they like dual boot systems as a permanent solution.

> My main concern is this problem did not exist in FC1.  Let's go over
> that again, since I've seen some people post that this is a Windows XP

  Regressions happen.  It's not good, but they happen.  Think of it this
way...someone new to Fedora Core installing FC2 making a dual boot
system out of a previously Windows XP system is going to have problems. 
>From the perspective of Fedora Core's goals, this person is:

1) Technically competent
2) A hobbyist, enthusiast, or other geek-like critter (me included)
3) Knows enough to not do this without a complete, restore-able backup.
4) Isn't using this on a critical, production system without knowing
that he is 'on his own' if he does.  That's me.  I use it on production,
critical systems, but I take FULL responsibility if it breaks.

  The PR value of this is going to be largely negative.  But the
pundits, when they do their reviews, though they will have a field day
with this, are in the end, just pundits.  NOBODY can say that Red Hat
hasn't been CRYSTAL CLEAR that Fedora Core is not a 'product' of Red
Hat.  It is a project aimed at hobbyist, enthusiasts, and developers who
know the risks involved and know how ti mitigate against them.

>   I have
> not yet seen any solution presented for the problem, but I'd appreciate
> a link if you know of one.  I certainly looked around when I was hit
> with this about a week ago.

  I don't have any solutions myself, I was only referring to your
workaround of installing FC1 and upgrading.  It's not a great solution,
but it is a workaround until Red Hat can issue an erratum.

On Sun, 2004-05-16 at 18:29, Phil Savoie wrote:
> ammunition to turn off Linux altogether.  Absolutely and totally 
> unprofessional, in my opinion.  I emphatically hope that the boxed 
> versions don't allow for this or there's going to be a huge outcry.

  And when were you led to believe that Fedora Core was in any intended
to be a 'professional' release of any kind?  It should work, and will
work on a dedicated system.  Dual boot is and always has been risk.  Use
Knoppix if you really need GNU/Linux functionality on an existing
Windows system.  Or whatever.  The point is, that there are other
solutions.  Dual boot is evil ;-).

-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
