You are lucky if that is all you have.
I cannot install because it does not find xfree86 RPM. I amusing the
downloaded iso images and that is what I get and I am then dead, no xfree86,
no install.
Anybody have a solution?
You are totally correct about Windows install being VASTLY better!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Puff@NLE [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 9:38 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [expert] MaximumLinux Magazine CD version of 7.1
>
>
> Hello Dennis,
>
> > No. Our beta-testing period for 7.1 was 3-4 x longer than for 7.0, and
> > there was nothing even near to "abrupt cesation" of testing.
> There were 3
> > public betas, and we did not receive any "critical bug reports" for the
> > third one, so we had all the reason to beleive that 7.1 will be a good
> > product (and it is).
> > but none are really "show stoppers" (workarounds exist), and I
> still think
> > that overal quality of 7.1 is miles better than 7.0, or any previous
> > Mandrake release:
>
> Well, as someone who had a little experience with 6.1, and
> recently did several installs of 7.1 (never tried 7.0), I would
> beg to differ with you big time. There are some significant bugs
> dealing mostly with the install that I have posted here, but no
> one has responded. And yes, they will keep 7.1 from installing!
> Let me see if I can recall these:
>
> 1. The CDROM bug: once you get to where it wants disk #2, the
> cdrom drive will not eject a disk. No way whatsoever to change
> disks. (I did manage to change the disk by powering down the
> CDROM drive, but then Linux wouldn't recognize it. Happened with
> two out of four computers.
>
> 2. The way to start the install program from a DOS prompt is
> broken - doesn't work at all.
>
> 3. The install program starts up running in high resolution, if
> it sees you have a card that can do it. Unfortunately, it
> doesn't ask if your monitor can support it, and thus my screen
> turned to hash, and I was unable to install the program.
> (Thankfully I had a multisync monitor on another system that I
> robbed long enough to do the install.) THis should default to
> 640x480, and ask / let you try higher rez if you want.
>
> 4. Setup properly detected my 3com 509 network card, then set up
> the wrong drivers for it! (Had to change from whatever it had to
> the 3com 509 driver, what a concept.)
>
> 5. Setup did not install the 75dpi or 100dpi fonts, which gave me
> all sorts of error messages when X tried to start.
>
> 6. My monitor type and card must have been screwed up somewhere
> in the detection, as I couldn't even get 256 colors at 640x480
> working on one system. When I tried running the XF86setup, it
> core dumps when you tell it to list devices.
>
> 7. "Automatic setup" is definitely not what anyone should use.
> It skips many important steps. Also installs junk packages, and
> doesn't install ones that should be installed by default (IMHO).
>
> 8. The KDE/X stuff looks like it was pre-configured for 1024x768
> rez. WHen you're in 640x480, some things are off the screen, and
> other boxes are so large you can't even get to an OK or CANCEL
> button! Even in Win95, it defaults to the lowest common
> denominator, and every window is accessible.
>
> I think that any of these things would cause a newbie to give up,
> if they didn't have persistence. I am not a Win95 (or microsoft)
> fan, but for the average user, their setup works a whole lot
> better. From reading the comments here, it seems that 7.0 didn't
> have some of the big nasty bugs that 7.1 has.
>
> Bob
>
