On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:31 PM Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote:
> My two cents: > > If there's a fallback option, and if the user selects it, they > shouldn't end up in an unambiguous state. Right now we're seeing > systems hanging. I'd rather see a crash than a hang where the user > can't get to a shell, and sees no useful information on the screen > that tells them why they're hung up; or even generically that "by now > you should see a login screen and if you don't we've faceplanted > somewhere, sorry". > > Maybe split the criterion: > > Basic criterion: installation media must have a basic video boot entry > that uses the accepted fallback boot parameter(s), e.g. nomodeset. The > criterion just means the media must have the menu entry, and that it > passes something intentional for this purpose as a boot parameter. > Sounds good. > > Final criterion: installation media's basic video boot entry should > either work (we get a successful graphical boot), or it should > faceplant in some unambiguous way. > I'd rather require it to just work. Based on Ajax's response that the code path is here to stay and they still need to support it because of VMs and fresh new graphics cards.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
