On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 18:14, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: > ** Lyvim Xaphir (Montag, 2. Juni 2003 21:30)
> > I don't want to say this, but I have to say it because it is the > > truth. For users of 8.2 or maybe even 9.0 there is no cogent reason > > to upgrade to 9.1, if you are seeking a stable production system. > > This is a subjective opinion. There are some reasons why someone who is > using Mandrake as a desktop system should upgrade (err - not upgrade, > I'll come to that later). We will have to agree to disagree on this. Cause from what I've seen on the list here there are more problems being posted than in times past, and this from users that I've been reading for a long while. > > The reasons I say this are myriad, but I'll cut it down to three or > > four. One, there was not enough manpower focused on 9.1 to release > > it as an improved distro over 9.0 or 8.2. This is demonstrable (at > > least on my system, which *has not changed* since LM82) because LM91 > > crashes and/or locks up, probably about an average of once per day. > > Hmm, I'm using 9.1 on 2 systems and I have not experienced one single > crash since I use it. And if you look through all the postings in the > newsgroup, there are problems, yes, but crashing reports are rare if > not not existant. > > > (It is also slower.) 30 minutes ago I was examining email, with no > > unusual activity going on, and XFree vaporized for no reason that I > > could discern, taking several smaller apps with it to their doom. > > That's just today. I won't say that LM82 never failed me at all, but > > I will say that I have a very strong memory of LM82 being about as > > stable as the crust of the planet Mars. Plus, it was faster. > > This is also an opinion, based on your individual expereince. This is more than an opinion, since the stopwatch is incapable of lying. > I have > just the opposite experience. To me 9.1 compared to 8.2 is sleek and > fast (run on the same hardware so I can compare). > I've started to use Mandrake Linux with version 5.3 and I see a straight > line of improvement, well, if you scratch 7.0 which was a piece of crap > IMHO. What do your benchmarks say, or have you run any? FYI the hardware here is identical to the LM82 days, as I have previously stated. As are the names of the apps. Same app names, same hardware, different distro. > > Second, it's been noted that there does not seem to be a formally > > presented system for production distro bugs or problems. Prior to > > the advent of 9.1 this was not a major issue, primarily because (IMO) > > the releases were so pristine that there was not a major need for > > one. The fact that there has been extensive discussion lately for a > > report route for production bug reports should be telling. > > How do you come to that? What about bugzilla? What about the errata > pages? Yes, what about bugzilla? And what about the errata pages? Neither address the point; which is formal bug reporting for production problems. > > > Third, (mostly) because of the rpmdrake user interface (NOT the urpmi > > improvements at the CLI level, which *are* good), I consider LM82 to > > be better than either 9.0 or 9.1. User interfaces should be agreed > > on and voted on by the users, and they should not be unilateral > > elitist decisions handed down by somebody who is not listening to > > you. In the case of both 9.0 and 9.1, the new rpmdrake UI was VOTED > > DOWN by the users and the old interface was *specifically asked* to > > be reinstituted. > > Would you agree that this is a very small issue? Depends on your perspective. In the overall space shuttle view of the company, no it's not a small issue, it sets a bad precedent. It is basically a statement that says the majority of Club members have no voice at those times when it really matters, or when it could be proven that their club dollars do actually buy a voice in LMXX architecture. In this case the money (silver, standard or otherwise) did not buy a voice. > Most users got used to > the new system - well, those users who use the GUI. The issue was > discussed for some time and now nobody cares anymore - at least from > the postings I read in the newsgroup and the mailing lists. > Some are bothered, some are not. The polls make all that academic and not useful to the crux of the issue. > > structure/engine, just the UI, or user presentation.) Their pleas > > and concerns were ignored. In fact, in the months just prior to Dr > > Denis Havlik's departure from Mandrake corporate, the rpmdrake vote > > for 9.1 was *taken off* the voting forums in order to silence the > > voices that were calling for it's return. The fact that this aspect > > of the voting process is basically ignored by the developers is not > > an issue that I am willing to let go; ever. Not until it is > > addressed. > > The issue was discussed to it's due extent and was closed. So what? > The voting system is and always was a system to give the developpers a > hint on what the club members would like to see in the next > distribution. It was never a system to tell the developpers what *has* > to be in the next distro. I've already stated my position clearly on this and you still don't understand; if you think it's OK to tell an overwhelmingly large majority of voters to bite the big one then we just disagree. It's a bad precedent and sets the stage for more to come. > > > 1) There should not be a cooker release labeled for production until > > it matches or exceeds the production performance of a satisfactory > > prior release. > > This would be the ideal world of distros. To me it is the the REAL world of distros, in which people need to do work, and has already demonstrably succeeded in the past with LM8X, so there's no reason it can't happen again. > If you want that way go to > Debian. It is something no commercial orientated company can go. I don't really know what "something no commercial orientated company can go" means. Can you revise your grammar a bit? > > > 2) There should be a formal production bug report system (utilizing > > Anthill preferably) that takes care of problems with supposedly > > stable production release bugs. In addition this should be priority > > over cooker, since your customer's work and productivity should be > > your first priority above all else. > > There is one with Bugzilla. You ever took a trip over there? The real question here is, have YOU been over there? Obviously not because we are talking about *production* release bugs here, and that (http://qa.mandrakesoft.com) is not where you go to post production bugs. There is a big fat disclaimer there that's plain to anyone who's not mentally challenged: "Warning : Bugzilla is for development version only (cooker), for any bug report on a stable version, please go to www.mandrakeexpert.com". Which you would have known if you were anywhere in the game. Furthermore it has been addressed that formal production bug reports (if and when they become a reality) would be better served by Anthill rather than another Bugzilla, which is one of the reasons I brought it up. > > > 3) If the voices of the paying members of Mandrakeclub are not heard > > within the Club voting system, then it calls into question the entire > > purpose of the voting system to begin with as well as the propaganda > > that idealizes it. > > See above. Maybe you misunderstood the concept a little bit. Repeat, the > voting system was never a roadmap forced on to the developpers, it was > a guideline. Read the articles about it. Hmmm. Well, based on what I've read so far I don't think I'm the one that's in need of some reading or understanding. > OK, so these more individually formed opinions out of the way, I'd like > to address the OP's issue: > > Upgrading is an option and it may all go well. IMHO upgrading is an > option if you want to stay up-to-date between releases. > Starting out with 5.3 I always did a clean install and just saved my > data partition and my /home directory. > In fact I came to the way Anne described (installing on a spare > partition and straighten out everything before making it the production > system). > > One major point for fresh installation comes from my experience during > the last 2 years: I never experienced most of the problems users > reported after an upgrade. The users who did upgrades faced much more > problems than those who did fresh installs and very often the problems > vanished when the user did a fresh installation after he messed up his > formerly unstable upgrade. > > Lyvim, did you upgrade or do a fresh install? The reason I advised the original author of this thread to do a fresh install was because I knew about the upgrade problems. So yes, I always install from scratch. > I very rarely read about > someone having such serious problems like you describe. There must be > reasons. Just sitting there and saying that 9.1 is unstable and > produced in a very unprofessional way is not a solution. I never presented a solution since it is the problem I have and not the solution. If I had the solution I would have never presented the problem. What information I have on this situation has been presented. So if you're telling me I'm not supposed to report problems on a support mailing list, then I'm just going to file 13 that suggestion with the production bug report info you provided. > wobo --LX -- 같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같 Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/ 같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
