Re: FC2 doubtful quality?

From: Robert P. J. Day (rpjday_at_mindspring.com)
Date: 06/22/04

  • Next message: David Jansen: "Re: FC2 doubtful quality?" 
    Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 07:35:30 -0400 (EDT)
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>

    On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Dexter Ang wrote:

    > HaJo Schatz wrote:
    >> Hi List,
    >>
    >> Long story, short question: Should I fall back to FC1 instead of using
    >> FC2? I am somewhat very concerned about the release quality of FC2.
    >> Here's what happened:
    >
    > It is all your choice. No one is forcing you to use FC2.

        to those folks who habitually respond to critisicm of FC 1/2 with this
    annoying, circle-the-wagons, defensive mentality, a piece of advice: grow
    up.

        when someone takes the time to document a number of legitimate concerns
    and obvious flaws in an *official* release (after three, count 'em,
    *three* test releases), and also legitimately asks whether he should be
    concerned about its quality, he deserves a better and more mature answer
    than "No one is forcing you to use FC2."

        it's become really tedious to watch the growing trend of promoting
    fedora core, talking about making it just a terrific distro, how it has a
    dynamic user community behind it ... yadda yadda yadda ... but whenever
    someone posts perfectly reasonable criticism of some aspect, there's a
    sudden surge of, "hey, if you don't like it, don't use it, ok?" i suspect
    it's not the quality of FC2 that might drive people off, it's the
    closed-minded and dismissive attitude of its alleged supporters.

    >> - Service PCMCIA doesn't load the yento-sockets module. This is known @
    >> bugzilla, one has to patch the pcmcia script by hand. Through this bug,
    >> the PCMCIA subsystem is non-functional!
    >
    > This seems to be system specific. My IBM Thinkpad T30's PCMCIA works without
    > any problems.

        well, good for you. and the fact that it works for you means ... what?
    that it doesn't qualify as a real problem? fact is, the
    /etc/init.d/pcmcia file has historically been a bit of a mess -- heck, i
    recall submitting a bug report on that file as far back as april of 2003:

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054

    it's depressing that it's still broken, and in such a blatant way.

    >> - My console-beep (emitted through the sound card) disappeared ever
    >> since FC2. I don't seem to be able to find a pointer on how to trace
    >> this...
    >
    > You must load the pcspkr module. It's been discussed and is in the archives.

    which doesn't dismiss the original poster's contention that it's still a
    mildly-annoying bug, and one which didn't exist in FC1. i don't think
    it's unreasonable for folks to gripe when things which once worked in FC1
    suddenly stopped working in FC2.

    >> This is the result after a few hours of FC2 experience and I really
    >> start wondering about what level of testing this release experienced
    >> before being released into the public -- even IMHO obvious things like
    >> the PCMCIA subsystem doesn't work! Seems to me that FC1 was by far the
    >> more reliable system.
    >
    > Realibility will depend on the number of people testing "test" releases. If
    > you want a quality release, you should help out by testing and reporting
    > bugs.

    oh, man, you *so* did not want to go there. working from memory here so i
    hope i'm remembering correctly, i'm pretty sure there have been at least a
    couple folks who pointed out that they *did* put in time running the test
    releases, that they *did* identify and report obvious bugs way back when
    and yet, when FC2 hit the streets, those bugs were still there.

    under the circumstances, then, it's pretty offensive to get testy with
    folks about how they should get involved in the testing process when many
    of them have done exactly that, only to see their efforts at bug
    identification and reporting make no difference in the final release. one
    might conclude that, under those circumstances, they really do have the
    right to wonder if it was worth the time and effort.

    > If you can't afford to use your machine for testing, your best hope is
    > to report bugs and wait for fixes.

    see above.

    > Again, no one's forcing you to use FC2.

    and again, this is a really childish response. one has to wonder, just
    what do you do for a living? i can just imagine, say, a car salesman with
    this kind of "don't you dare criticize me and my product" attitude:

    Salesman: "Yes, sir, Mr. Smith, this van has the horsepower you need for
    pulling your boat, loads of cargo space and foldout seats for the kids,
    optional 6-way sound system since you like music."

    Mr. Smith: "Yup, it's almost perfect, but I'm not sure if my current roof
    rack is compatible with the roof mounts ..."

    Salesman: "HEY! No one's *forcing* you to buy this thing, OK? You got a
    problem with it?! There's lots of other dealers out there, all right?!"

    > Obviously you have the time to format and install an entirely new system
    > without assessing the possible issues first, so why not try SuSE?

    hey, good idea, dude. there's nothing that placates an unsatisfied user
    more than suggesting they take their talents elsewhere. *that'll* help
    the cause, fer shure.

    > Giving up on FC2 is really your decision. Either help out, by living
    > through bugs and reporting them, or just switch to something that works.

    once again, see above. ("... or just switch to something that works."
    now *there's* some great testimonial.)

    > I am hoping that through my and others' efforts, FC3 will be a superb
    > release.

    and if it isn't, well, those whiners can take their complaints elsewhere,
    can't they?

    rday 

    -- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
  • Next message: David Jansen: "Re: FC2 doubtful quality?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: FC2 doubtful quality?
      ... I would like to congratulate the developers that made FC2. ... with FC1. ... > and yet, when FC2 hit the streets, those bugs were still there. ... > identification and reporting make no difference in the final release. ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: FC2 doubtful quality?
      ... > FC2 was released when there were known unresolved bugs in the test releases. ... Please keep releasing early and often. ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: GNOME is Annoying!!!
      ... > I try running GNOME to see what's new. ... I hate to break it to you, but FC2 *is* beta. ... run FC1 just fine - after I got the bugs out of my systems. ... let all the features in 2.6 kernels shake out. ...
      (comp.os.linux.misc)
    • Re:
      ... With all the posts, I am real leary of going to FC2. ... I will switch to FC2 when I feel it's bugs are for the most part "squshed" ... but SuSE for example has its share of 2.6-related surprises too it ...
      (Fedora)
    • Bugzilla and management thereof
      ... reporting it to bugzilla. ... the report could be updated to note that it still applies to f7. ... auto-closes bugs from older releases*. ... I was assuming that if Ray decided it was an upstream bug he'd ...
      (Fedora)