On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 14:54, Ron Stodden wrote: > Vincent Danen wrote: > > On Mon Feb 03, 2003 at 07:40:27PM +1100, Ron Stodden wrote: > > >>Interestingly, a reinstall did not fix anything, like it does with > >>Windows 98 > >>(but _NOT_ always) - which is a serious requirements or design problem with > >>the Mandrake installer. > > > > > > The installer goes with the packages it's given... it doesn't install > > something and go "hey wait a minute" and intelligently fix your problem > > for you. > > It should restore your system to the same state as when it was originally > installed, except for your customisation and data, which it and rpm > knows to > leave alone. This does imply checksums or backup copies on hand of > installed > unchanging files. The installer/reinstaller has access to the RPM > library used > at original installation. >
It'd be great if it wold wax my car too -- I mean, I can manage the time to do the coin-op car wash and everything, but it's not the same as a really good hand-buff. > My point is that Win 98 does this. Plainly, or fortuitously, it was an > important > requirement and goal of installer implementation. That may be the intention, but a reinstall of Windows over the same partition has never actually solved a problem for me -- and let me tell you, I've tried more than once :-) > New arrivals to Mandrake > from Windows - near all of us? - Primarily using Linux since 1998. > expect no less, particularly when no other > solution to a randomly clobbered system is offered. Recall that the i86 > architecture fails to offer hardware memory block protection that would > immediately > trap any program's attempt to write-access outside its allocated or > shared memory > blocks. The CDC 6600 had this implemented, so the technology is > nothing new - > except to Intel. That's the major reason why i86 architecture is not > "safe", > especially for multiple concurrent users, and not useable for critical > missions. Let's take a moment to re-evaluate the hardware decisions that we've all made... Anyone using hardware-protected-memory big iron for a desktop or laptop, raise your hand! Personally, I'm gonna trade in my Vaio for an AS/400 (or whatever it's call this week) because it just raises eyebrows when you roll that big black box into a meeting :-) Seriously, the old saying applies here: "Unix is user-friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are." If you want it to protect you from screwing up your system and make roll-back of mistakes a perfect and easy one-click operation, come back in five years and it might be there. In the meantime, try something that starts with user experience and then works towards power-usage and cool features instead of the other way around. > > It is incredible to me that this obvious requirement seems to have been > totally > overlooked by Mandrake. which is more evidence that the developers just > ignore > industry experience and do not appear to actually be using the product > in any > user-workhorse mode. The industry is pretty clear that it accepts Linux on the low-to-mid-range X86 server and may eventually accept it on desktops. Everything else is bleeding edge hackers. > > Unless you're referring to another issue beyond the KDE > > cosmetics and mozilla printing, I'm not sure why you think DrakX has > > anything to do with it. > > Explained above. -- Jack Coates Monkeynoodle: A Scientific Venture...
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
