Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
70 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
http://en.opensuse.org/Bugs:Most_Annoying_Bugs

Read this before insalling.

It's got something there which has been plaguing me for ~ installs now
:-( . Perhaps my next (re)install will now go smoothly--maybe, possibly,
fingers crossed.

Cheers.

--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

C-29
> http://en.opensuse.org/Bugs:Most_Annoying_Bugs
>
> Read this before insalling.
>
> It's got something there which has been plaguing me for ~ installs now
> :-( . Perhaps my next (re)install will now go smoothly--maybe, possibly,
> fingers crossed.

I've definitely been hit by at least a couple of those bugs...
particularly annoying was the one where adding additional sources
broke the install.

I've also opened a bug on the Segfault I keep having (over multiple
clean installs).

:-)  It's definitely a Beta 1.

C

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
Clayton wrote:

>> http://en.opensuse.org/Bugs:Most_Annoying_Bugs
>>
>> Read this before insalling.
>>
>> It's got something there which has been plaguing me for ~ installs now
>> :-( . Perhaps my next (re)install will now go smoothly--maybe, possibly,
>> fingers crossed.
>
> I've definitely been hit by at least a couple of those bugs...
> particularly annoying was the one where adding additional sources
> broke the install.

*This* is what I wanted to hear from you right at the beginning when I
asked if you could let me know how your installation went. So, you DID
have this problem which has been sending me around the bend for 2 days
now. The failed install is what causes one to have to login in as root only.

But the real hassle with ignoring to install the additional sources is
that when you go into Yast2 to look at which packages are installed or
to go and create new install sources, Yast2 simply exits back to the
window and there is no way to see what is installed so that one can add
from the CD/DVD.


> I've also opened a bug on the Segfault I keep having (over multiple
> clean installs).
>
> :-)  It's definitely a Beta 1.


To me a beta is something which should only contain the most hidden
bugs. All bugs like the ones mentioned in the Annoying Bugs should NOT
be there but should have been picked up by alpha 3 at least. For
chrissake, the act of simply *installing* the bloody thing is tainted!
Now how braindead is that? Doesn't anyone install the damn thing if only
to see that the thing will install before placing on the server for
people to download and install?!

There is some very funny thinking behind all this. Makes one wonder...

Cheers.


--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Carlos E. R.-2
In reply to this post by Basil Chupin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


The Sunday 2006-10-29 at 16:12 +1100, Basil Chupin wrote:

> http://en.opensuse.org/Bugs:Most_Annoying_Bugs
>
> Read this before insalling.

|     * During installation you will be asked if you want to add additional      
|       installation sources. That will often fail and cause the installation    
|       routine to abort leaving you with an incomplete configured system.      
|       Workaround: don't agree to add additional sources. Bug 214886            

That means that I'll have to wait till they solve it before I try :-/

- --
Cheers,
       Carlos E. R.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQFFRQRjtTMYHG2NR9URAkczAJ9BaP/YvbHXGljctPSQb26HbQB/qACgl7DR
iSR933RL8HzFrV+liRJ+97A=
=SBcc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
Carlos E. R. wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> The Sunday 2006-10-29 at 16:12 +1100, Basil Chupin wrote:
>
>> http://en.opensuse.org/Bugs:Most_Annoying_Bugs
>>
>> Read this before insalling.
>
> |     * During installation you will be asked if you want to add additional      
> |       installation sources. That will often fail and cause the installation    
> |       routine to abort leaving you with an incomplete configured system.      
> |       Workaround: don't agree to add additional sources. Bug 214886            
>
> That means that I'll have to wait till they solve it before I try :-/

You bet. The work around only give yous the opportunity to see what the
layout is like and try out the applications which WERE installed during
the installation. But if you want to know what actually WAS installed or
want to delete/add software you have as much chance of doing so as
flying by flapping your arms. Pitiful.

Cheers.


--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

C-29
In reply to this post by Basil Chupin
> *This* is what I wanted to hear from you right at the beginning when I
> asked if you could let me know how your installation went. So, you DID
> have this problem which has been sending me around the bend for 2 days
> now. The failed install is what causes one to have to login in as root only.

Well... yes and no.  This only happened on the second full install I
tried.  When it failed, I rebooted to 10.1, and went looking in
Bugzilla and in the Most Annoying Bugs list.  When I spotted my
problem as a known problem and a workaround, I started the 10.2
install over again...  so while I did bump into the broken install
thing after enabling Additional Sources, I did not take it any further
- I didn't attempt to complete the install after it broke... so didn't
come across the root only login issue.


> to go and create new install sources, Yast2 simply exits back to the
> window and there is no way to see what is installed so that one can add
> from the CD/DVD.

This might be related to the bug I opened regarding a repeatable
SegFault I get with Yast... maybe?


> To me a beta is something which should only contain the most hidden
> bugs. All bugs like the ones mentioned in the Annoying Bugs should NOT
> be there but should have been picked up by alpha 3 at least.

Yah true, but the install base on the Alpha versions is a LOT smaller
than on the Beta.  Plus loads of people are installing Alpha in a
VM... so real world testing on the menagerie of computers out there
doesn't actually start happening until it's released on us unwashed
masses.

C.

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
Clayton wrote:

[pruned]

>> To me a beta is something which should only contain the most hidden
>> bugs. All bugs like the ones mentioned in the Annoying Bugs should NOT
>> be there but should have been picked up by alpha 3 at least.


> Yah true, but the install base on the Alpha versions is a LOT smaller
> than on the Beta.  Plus loads of people are installing Alpha in a
> VM... so real world testing on the menagerie of computers out there
> doesn't actually start happening until it's released on us unwashed
> masses.

You don't need to be a George W Bush to burn a few copies of the CDs,
take them home and hand one set to the kids and another/the others to
the neighbour(')s(') kids and tell them to try and install the latest
and greatest new version of Suse which is about to be foisted on the
great unwashed who will spend time (and money) downloading the thing and
becoming guinea pigs to be "gotcha"-ed by the little hidden "treasures"
inside the OS.

As it now stands, I have a copy and you have a copy which cannot be
fixed by any patch to be issued as a fix because there is no
upgrade/fixing mechanism available. (Were have I seen this before, hm?)

I tried installing the version of smart which is on the Suse site but it
collapses with a dependency error showing that  version <2.9 of
something (??glib--can't recall at the moment) is needed.

I am going to try and install a copy of smart put together by Pascal
Bleser and see what this produces.

Cheers.


--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

John Andersen
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 01:28, Basil Chupin wrote:
> As it now stands, I have a copy and you have a copy which cannot be
> fixed by any patch to be issued as a fix because there is no
> upgrade/fixing mechanism available. (Were have I seen this before, hm?)

So its not ready for prime time.  Give it a week or two Basil and
try Kubuntu in the mean time.

--
_____________________________________
John Andersen

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
John Andersen wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 October 2006 01:28, Basil Chupin wrote:
>> As it now stands, I have a copy and you have a copy which cannot be
>> fixed by any patch to be issued as a fix because there is no
>> upgrade/fixing mechanism available. (Were have I seen this before, hm?)
>
> So its not ready for prime time.  Give it a week or two Basil and
> try Kubuntu in the mean time.

I'm trying to try kubuntu, John. It won't install on my computer--well,
it starts but when the Live version(1) kicks in the screen is all
gibberish (best way to describe it is that it is in 4-bit, pre-CGA, mode
:-) ). The RC1 seemed OK but the final is just a bit 'different'. I'll
be trying an install again shortly but this time I won' fiddle with the
F-keys at boot stage :-) .

(1) The final 6.10 boots up as a Live version and you then have the
option of actually installing it on the HD.

Cheers.



--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

C-29
In reply to this post by Basil Chupin
> the neighbour(')s(') kids and tell them to try and install the latest
> and greatest new version of Suse which is about to be foisted on the
> great unwashed who will spend time (and money) downloading the thing and
> becoming guinea pigs to be "gotcha"-ed by the little hidden "treasures"
> inside the OS.

I don't see the issue... it's a Beta 1 release.  If everything worked
perfectly in a Beta 1 release, it wouldn't be a Beta 1 release... it'd
be a formal release.  If you're installing 10.2 Beta 1 expecting a
fully functioning release, you're in for a nasty shock.  Yes, if
you're handing this release out to everyone, it's going to fail and
rather spectacularly too.

Did you read the info when you installed... it clearly stated it was a
Beta version :-)

Anyway... hang in there... Beta 2 is due out soon.  Maybe the update
mechanism will be fixed with Beta 2

C.

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
Clayton wrote:

>> the neighbour(')s(') kids and tell them to try and install the latest
>> and greatest new version of Suse which is about to be foisted on the
>> great unwashed who will spend time (and money) downloading the thing and
>> becoming guinea pigs to be "gotcha"-ed by the little hidden "treasures"
>> inside the OS.
>
> I don't see the issue... it's a Beta 1 release.  If everything worked
> perfectly in a Beta 1 release, it wouldn't be a Beta 1 release... it'd
> be a formal release.  If you're installing 10.2 Beta 1 expecting a
> fully functioning release, you're in for a nasty shock.  Yes, if
> you're handing this release out to everyone, it's going to fail and
> rather spectacularly too.
>
> Did you read the info when you installed... it clearly stated it was a
> Beta version :-)

Here is what the wikipedia, in part, has to say about beta version:

QUOTE
beta release (pronounced "beetah" or "bayta") usually represents the
first version of a computer program that implements all features in the
initial software requirements specification. It is likely to be unstable
but useful for internal demonstrations and previews to select customers,
but not yet ready for release. Some developers refer to this stage as a
preview, as a technical preview (TP) or as an early access.
UNQUOTE

It then goes on to say-

QUOTE
When a beta becomes available to the general public it is often widely
used by the technologically savvy and those familiar with previous
versions as though it were the finished product.
UNQUOTE


> Anyway... hang in there... Beta 2 is due out soon.  Maybe the update
> mechanism will be fixed with Beta 2

Once bitten twice shy :-) .

I'll wait till version 11.0, thanks.

Cheers.

--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

C-29
> Here is what the wikipedia, in part, has to say about beta version:

Wikipedia is a source you need to take with the proverbial grain of salt.


> QUOTE
> beta release (pronounced "beetah" or "bayta") usually represents the
> first version of a computer program that implements all features in the
> initial software requirements specification. It is likely to be unstable
> but useful for internal demonstrations and previews to select customers,
> but not yet ready for release. Some developers refer to this stage as a
> preview, as a technical preview (TP) or as an early access.
> UNQUOTE


OK.. did you miss this key part?
QUOTE
It is likely to be unstable
UNQUOTE

or this bit?
QUOTE
but not yet ready for release.
UNQUOTE

So.. openSUSE Beta 1 is feature complete, but... "unstable"... and...
"not yet ready for release".... exactly as you're definition of Beta
states.  And exactly as Novell/SUSE claims it is.

So your point is what?  You proved my point with your own reply.. that
its Beta 1... you cannot expect it to be working 100%.


> I'll wait till version 11.0, thanks.

You're more than welcome to wait :-)  but... openSUSE 11.0 Beta 1 will
also be a bit wobbly.

I work in software development... been in some aspect of development
for years... NEVER have I even seen a rock solid Beta.  There has
always been some issue that was classed a Blocker or Critical... and
that was fixed by Beta 2 or Beta 3.

<shrug>  If you load up a Beta 1 release expecting that it's the final
release, you will ALWAYS be disappointed.

As an alternative perspective, look at the disaster that MS Vista was
in the Beta 1 round.  It was horrible.  it crashed all the time.  it
was slow and clunky.  Things didn't work right... as subsequent Betas
were released the code was cleaned up and it's become at least
marginally usable (as much as we can expect from Microsoft anyway).


C.

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Darryl Gregorash
In reply to this post by C-29
On 31/10/06 05:01, Clayton wrote:
> <snip>
> I don't see the issue... it's a Beta 1 release.  If everything worked
> perfectly in a Beta 1 release, it wouldn't be a Beta 1 release... it'd
> be a formal release.  
No, it wouldn't.. it'd be a beta 1 with no bugs found as yet :-)

In reality, probably the only significant difference between alpha<last>
and beta 1 is that a first beta of anything is usually the first
feature-complete release. Historically, beta 1 has been the first
release to go "out of house" for testing. When the prospective end users
get their hands on something, you don't want it to be a moving target.
OpenSuSE has upset that cart a bit, by making the 10.2 alphas available
to those end users, but only beta 1 is marked "feature complete".

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Felix Miata
In reply to this post by John Andersen
On 06/10/31 02:32 (GMT-0800) John Andersen apparently typed:

> On Tuesday 31 October 2006 01:28, Basil Chupin wrote:

>> As it now stands, I have a copy and you have a copy which cannot be
>> fixed by any patch to be issued as a fix because there is no
>> upgrade/fixing mechanism available. (Were have I seen this before, hm?)

> So its not ready for prime time.  Give it a week or two Basil and
> try Kubuntu in the mean time.

If you use Matrox, you will be an unhappy camper if you do. Matrox driver
was broken long before latest Ubuntu was released last week and still
isn't fixed.
--
"The Lord is my strength and my shield; my heart trusts in him,
and I am helped." Psalm 28:7 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Darryl Gregorash
In reply to this post by Basil Chupin
On 31/10/06 05:49, Basil Chupin wrote:
> <snip>
> Here is what the wikipedia, in part, has to say about beta version:
Basil, if you are relying on wikipedia as being definitive, I have some
farmland to sell you -- about 350 km due east of Sydney :-)

>
> QUOTE
> beta release (pronounced "beetah" or "bayta") usually represents the
> first version of a computer program that implements all features in
> the initial software requirements specification. It is likely to be
> unstable but useful for internal demonstrations and previews to select
> customers, but not yet ready for release. Some developers refer to
> this stage as a preview, as a technical preview (TP) or as an early
> access.
> UNQUOTE
>
> It then goes on to say-
>
> QUOTE
> When a beta becomes available to the general public it is often widely
> used by the technologically savvy and those familiar with previous
> versions as though it were the finished product.
> UNQUOTE
And general availability of the 10.2 alphas does what to this statement?
This statement naturally extends to "a beta is generally regarded by the
techoids and the experienced user as a finished product".. note the
subtle difference, "regarded to be finished" vs. "used as if it were
finished". IMO, both views are ludicrous. A beta is there to be broken
(ie. you're the end user, try it, break it, and let us know what bugs
you find).

The first quote you cite is quite accurate, particularly the part that
says "not yet ready for release". The second one is a world full of
rose-coloured glasses.



--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
Darryl Gregorash wrote:
> On 31/10/06 05:49, Basil Chupin wrote:
>> <snip>
>> Here is what the wikipedia, in part, has to say about beta version:

> Basil, if you are relying on wikipedia as being definitive, I have some
> farmland to sell you -- about 350 km due east of Sydney :-)

Not interested in farmland--there's a drought you know. But I'm in the
market for a good Bridge, preferably with Harbour views, if you have
something in this line.


>> QUOTE
>> beta release (pronounced "beetah" or "bayta") usually represents the
>> first version of a computer program that implements all features in
>> the initial software requirements specification. It is likely to be
>> unstable but useful for internal demonstrations and previews to select
>> customers, but not yet ready for release. Some developers refer to
>> this stage as a preview, as a technical preview (TP) or as an early
>> access.
>> UNQUOTE
>>
>> It then goes on to say-
>>
>> QUOTE
>> When a beta becomes available to the general public it is often widely
>> used by the technologically savvy and those familiar with previous
>> versions as though it were the finished product.
>> UNQUOTE

> And general availability of the 10.2 alphas does what to this statement?
> This statement naturally extends to "a beta is generally regarded by the
> techoids and the experienced user as a finished product".. note the
> subtle difference, "regarded to be finished" vs. "used as if it were
> finished". IMO, both views are ludicrous. A beta is there to be broken
> (ie. you're the end user, try it, break it, and let us know what bugs
> you find).

I think both you and Clayton are missing the point here. I fully
understand and accept that a beta may be unstable and there to be broken
(but strangely, every beta of Firefox has performed almost flawlessly;
the same I can say about Thunderbird and I am now using the beta1 of
v2.0 without any problems [except one very minor one which doesn't
affect its daily use]).

Before you can find out if the program is unstable or can be broken you
must be able to *install* the damn thing. Beta1 won't even install
correctly for chrissake! :-) . You cannot even find out what has been
installed when you do install it after doing the "workaround" because
one of the key components--for which 10.1 has now become infamous--is
not installed by the installation module!

If you look at the Most Annoying Bugs list you will see that there was
no mention for the need of a "workaround" during installation in alpha5
--it came in at the beta 1 stage. Now, surely any fair minded person
would take this as progress, a natural step necessary for the software
to now come under the definition of a beta and therefore be deemed as
possibly unstable and probably full of bugs.

How can you take a piece of software called v10.1 which works, work on
it for months to fix any discovered bugs as well as introduce new
features, eg the latest Linux kernel and the new-look menus, call the
work-in-progress alphas, reach alpha5 stage and then put out a beta
which won't even install?!

[pruned]


Cheers.


--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Basil Chupin
In reply to this post by Felix Miata
Felix Miata wrote:

> On 06/10/31 02:32 (GMT-0800) John Andersen apparently typed:
>
>> On Tuesday 31 October 2006 01:28, Basil Chupin wrote:
>
>>> As it now stands, I have a copy and you have a copy which cannot be
>>> fixed by any patch to be issued as a fix because there is no
>>> upgrade/fixing mechanism available. (Were have I seen this before, hm?)
>
>> So its not ready for prime time.  Give it a week or two Basil and
>> try Kubuntu in the mean time.
>
> If you use Matrox, you will be an unhappy camper if you do. Matrox driver
> was broken long before latest Ubuntu was released last week and still
> isn't fixed.

The nVidia driver is also broken I am sure--but I say this with a
qualification: the driver does not like the nVidia 6600 card I have;
however, I think it is OK with the 5500 card I have on the other
computer. I'll check this out later (after I install 10.1 there to test
an idea I have about the nVidia driver problem Carlos and Fred are having).

Cheers.

--
I'm dangerous when I know what I'm doing.


--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Randall Schulz
In reply to this post by Basil Chupin
Hi,

On Tuesday 31 October 2006 03:49, Basil Chupin wrote:

> ...
>
> Here is what the wikipedia, in part, has to say about beta version:
>
> QUOTE
> beta release (pronounced "beetah" or "bayta") usually represents the
> first version of a computer program that implements all features in
> the initial software requirements specification. It is likely to be
> unstable but useful for internal demonstrations and previews to
> select customers, but not yet ready for release. Some developers
> refer to this stage as a preview, as a technical preview (TP) or as
> an early access.
> UNQUOTE
>
> It then goes on to say-
>
> QUOTE
> When a beta becomes available to the general public it is often
> widely used by the technologically savvy and those familiar with
> previous versions as though it were the finished product.
> UNQUOTE

To which we should add that users of beta software must be willing to
accept bugs and generally unpredictable behavior and should not put it
into any kind of mission-critical use.

I'm currently running 10.2 beta1 (I started with alpha5) because I'm
bringing a new machine into service and its hardware is so new as to
require the latest and greatest. Neither the beta of Ubuntu (of three
weeks ago) nor the then-current FC 6 beta were capable of installing
because they lacked sufficient hardware drivers.

SuSE is still king!


Randall Schulz

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Randall Schulz
In reply to this post by Darryl Gregorash
Darryl,

On Tuesday 31 October 2006 04:17, Darryl Gregorash wrote:
> ...
>
> And general availability of the 10.2 alphas does what to this
> statement?

I believe the Wikipedia definition to be the "classic" software
development one and does not reflect practice of today's "community"
software projects such as Fedora Core or openSUSE.


> ...


Randall Schuzl

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Installing 10.2 beta 1: read this BEFORE installing

Darryl Gregorash
In reply to this post by Basil Chupin
On 31/10/06 07:05, Basil Chupin wrote:

> Darryl Gregorash wrote:
>> On 31/10/06 05:49, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> Here is what the wikipedia, in part, has to say about beta version:
>
>> Basil, if you are relying on wikipedia as being definitive, I have some
>> farmland to sell you -- about 350 km due east of Sydney :-)
>
> Not interested in farmland--there's a drought you know. But I'm in the
> market for a good Bridge, preferably with Harbour views, if you have
> something in this line.
Sorry, have no bridges. How about some beachfront property near Alice
Springs?


> I think both you and Clayton are missing the point here. I fully
> understand and accept that a beta may be unstable and there to be
> broken (but strangely, every beta of Firefox has performed almost
> flawlessly; the same I can say about Thunderbird and I am now using
> the beta1 of v2.0 without any problems [except one very minor one
> which doesn't affect its daily use]).
Given the number of open severe bugs I just found in the mozilla core
alone, I have to say you are very lucky.
>
> Before you can find out if the program is unstable or can be broken
> you must be able to *install* the damn thing. Beta1 won't even install
> correctly for chrissake! :-) . You cannot even find out what has been
> installed when you do install it after doing the "workaround" because
> one of the key components--for which 10.1 has now become infamous--is
> not installed by the installation module!
Is Yast not installed?

I won't try to suggest that the problem is a trivial one, because it
isn't. Beyond suggesting it might be the unintentional byproduct of some
other bug fix (which probably happens a lot more often than anyone might
wish to believe), I wont' even speculate how or why it arose.

But that is what you get when you sign up for a beta. If you don't even
have Yast, the old standby, at your disposal, then yes, it is
irreparably broken. Is it really that bad?

--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to [hidden email]
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: [hidden email]


1234