Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/12/2013 02:39 AM, Dan Mashal wrote: >> >> Right because you do that for every single update you push? > > > For new upstream releases, I certainly try to. > > >> Honestly, I'm done arguing my point. Other people in this thread have made >> arguments for it, other people including yourself have made arguments >> against it. This is turning into a "what should the default desktop be" >> discussion. So I'm dropping off. This is a SHOULD not a MUST. If you have >> packaged for a while, you'd get that. From your previous emails it doesn't >> seem you are. Hopefully, this one makes my point more clearly. Dan > > I have been packaging long before Fedora even existed and > maintain/co-maintain over a hundred RPM packages for Fedora but that's > besides the point. That's great. I looked at your bodhi pushes. Good for you. > Providing links in the changelog is just good practice. > Telling that users can just google isn't. > > > Rahul > But it's not a requirement. And again, sometimes upstream does not provide a changelog. Is this is in the Fedora packaging/updating guidelines? I'm not doubting your technical skills. I'm making a few points. a) sometimes upstream doesn't provide a changelog b) sometimes you have a LOT of packages to push out. c) sometimes even you yourself don't know what to put in the notes. d) sometimes there's really not much else to put at all. e) different packagers have different upstreams to work with, which goes back to point A. The updates sit in updates-testing for 7+ days before being moved to stable. At any which point anyone can leave negative karma if there is an issue. Looking at your updates you got negative karma and pushed to stable anyway. Like I said, I'd rather not get in semantics. I'm just making a point. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:30:13PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote: > After a few iterations I'd also be cursing the idiots who designed such > an unfriendly user interface just because they didn't want any text on > the screen. After a few iterations you should just enable bootloader menu with timeout appropriate for you. -- Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality. xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl-- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On 03/12/2013 02:39 AM, Dan Mashal wrote: Right because you do that for every single update you push? For new upstream releases, I certainly try to. Honestly, I'm done arguing my point. Other people in this thread have made arguments for it, other people including yourself have made arguments against it. This is turning into a "what should the default desktop be" discussion. So I'm dropping off. This is a SHOULD not a MUST. If you have packaged for a while, you'd get that. From your previous emails it doesn't seem you are. Hopefully, this one makes my point more clearly. Dan I have been packaging long before Fedora even existed and maintain/co-maintain over a hundred RPM packages for Fedora but that's besides the point. Providing links in the changelog is just good practice. Telling that users can just google isn't. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:37 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/12/2013 01:30 AM, Dan Mashal wrote: >> >> Semantics. > > > Providing a link is helpful to users isn't semantics. You as a package > maintainer would be aware of where to look for reviewing the changes before > pushing an update. Users don't since it is different for different projects > and is not necessarily obvious or even easily searchable. Just take that > few seconds of additional effort and provide the link. > > > Rahul > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Right because you do that for every single update you push? Honestly, I'm done arguing my point. Other people in this thread have made arguments for it, other people including yourself have made arguments against it. This is turning into a "what should the default desktop be" discussion. So I'm dropping off. This is a SHOULD not a MUST. If you have packaged for a while, you'd get that. From your previous emails it doesn't seem you are. Hopefully, this one makes my point more clearly. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On 03/12/2013 01:30 AM, Dan Mashal wrote: Semantics. Providing a link is helpful to users isn't semantics. You as a package maintainer would be aware of where to look for reviewing the changes before pushing an update. Users don't since it is different for different projects and is not necessarily obvious or even easily searchable. Just take that few seconds of additional effort and provide the link. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/11/2013 10:29 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: >> >> For what though? You can google it and find it too. > > > You can google and install the software too but we don't make users do that. > What we provide for them is convenience and a direct link is a good way to > accomplish that. > >> And on minor release versions they sometimes don't update the ChangeLog at >> all until the major release version. You're better off watching github >> commit history half the time. > > > Not all projects use github or git. Not even the majority of them do. > > Rahul > > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Semantics. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Every text editor crashed
On Mar 11, 2013, at 10:51 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: > Things got horrible now. > > A few minutes ago, I plug my AC power and my laptop crashed. > > Then it cannot startup anymore... > > BTRFS is crashed. There's not nearly enough information to go on here to suggest it's a development problem. I think this is more of a users@ list issue at this point. If you're having problems with system, application, and /home on btrfs problems, that all sounds related to hardware. I'd look at smartctl -x for all the drives, run an extended offline test, force check the file systems, the basics, see what's working correctly and not. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On 03/11/2013 10:29 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: For what though? You can google it and find it too. You can google and install the software too but we don't make users do that. What we provide for them is convenience and a direct link is a good way to accomplish that. And on minor release versions they sometimes don't update the ChangeLog at all until the major release version. You're better off watching github commit history half the time. Not all projects use github or git. Not even the majority of them do. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Every text editor crashed
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On 11/03/13 09:51 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: >> >> Things got horrible now. >> >> A few minutes ago, I plug my AC power and my laptop crashed. >> >> Then it cannot startup anymore... >> >> BTRFS is crashed. > > > Yeah, kinda sounds like catastrophic data loss. Have fun with that! > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora > http://www.happyassassin.net > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel :/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Every text editor crashed
In fact nothing important stored on that partition... I'll have fun with fixing possibility. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Every text editor crashed
On 11/03/13 09:51 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: Things got horrible now. A few minutes ago, I plug my AC power and my laptop crashed. Then it cannot startup anymore... BTRFS is crashed. Yeah, kinda sounds like catastrophic data loss. Have fun with that! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Every text editor crashed
Things got horrible now. A few minutes ago, I plug my AC power and my laptop crashed. Then it cannot startup anymore... BTRFS is crashed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: well!
On 03/12/2013 12:41 AM, Charles Zeitler wrote: i don't like giving up control over my machine (partitioning), so i won't be upgrading to Fedora 18. i'll watch the web site for a return to sanity. charles zeitler Setting aside the drama, you can manually partition F18. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] [FINAL NOTICE] Retiring packages for Fedora 19
Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) said: > Before we branch for Fedora 19, as is custom, we will block currently > orphaned packages and packages that have failed to build since Fedora 17. > > The following packages are currently orphaned, or fail to build. If > you have a need for one of these packages, please pick them up. > If no one claims any of these packages, they will be blocked before > we branch for Fedora 19. That is currently scheduled to happen on > or around 3AM GMT on March 12. (i.e., about 11 hours from now.) The following packages have been retired: HippoDraw Temperature.app afraid-dyndns alsamixer-dockapp aplus-fsf aswvdial auto-nng bamf blazeblogger c2050 c2070 canto certmaster compton cputnik em8300 emacs-ecb fcron gkrellm-weather global gnome-mag griffith guimup haildb inamik-tableformatter javacsv libdrizzle libopensync-plugin-sunbird lx mimetic mingw-openjpeg mlmmj mtpfs nagios-plugins-rhev ncpfs nitrogen obapps ocaml-cmigrep pbm2l2030 pbm2l7k pclock perl-Bio-Graphics perl-Fedora-Bugzilla perl-bioperl perl-bioperl-run pidgin-gfire python-chm python-drizzle python-wsgi-jsonrpc rubygem-acts-as-list spicebird trac-agilo-plugin util-vserver vdr-skins vdr-text2skin vdr-wapd volpack wmSun wmbinclock wmblob wmcalc wmcore wmcube wmdrawer wmeyes wmnet wmpuzzle wmsystemtray wmtictactoe wmtop wmwave wmweather xml-writer -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
well!
i don't like giving up control over my machine (partitioning), so i won't be upgrading to Fedora 18. i'll watch the web site for a return to sanity. charles zeitler -- Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Every text editor crashed
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: > Hi, > > I've encountered a problem. > > Today my gnome-settings-daemon crashed and I tried to use abrt to > feedback.After retracing abrt let me to see the environ...cmdline...and many > things. > > When I clicked the backtrace tab I found it contains too many lines...Some > are hidden. But when I tried to see lines hidden by clicking arrow down, > abrt itself crashed. > > This also happened in gedit. If I want to see more lines outside of current > textspace it will crash. > > Please fix.My system is totally updated. > > Thanks. > > > > Yours sincerely, > Christopher Meng > > Got problems with Windows? - ReBoot > Got problems with Linux? - Be Root > > Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others. > http://cicku.me > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Try mate-text-editor. cmdline name is "pluma" Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Every text editor crashed
Hi, I've encountered a problem. Today my gnome-settings-daemon crashed and I tried to use abrt to feedback.After retracing abrt let me to see the environ...cmdline...and many things. When I clicked the backtrace tab I found it contains too many lines...Some are hidden. But when I tried to see lines hidden by clicking arrow down, abrt itself crashed. This also happened in gedit. If I want to see more lines outside of current textspace it will crash. Please fix.My system is totally updated. Thanks. *Yours sincerely,* *Christopher Meng* Got problems with Windows? - ReBoot Got problems with Linux? - Be Root Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others. http://cicku.me -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
Users who want to know the changelog mostly will go to homepage or github like Dan said. If some one even don't know upstream is what, I think changelog is useless for him. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Mathieu Bridon wrote: > On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 12:06 -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro >> wrote: >> > Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount >> > of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest >> > upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora >> > given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be >> > seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is >> > where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one >> > multiple times within the past couple of weeks.) >> >> I tend to agree here. That being said, most of my package updates are >> something along the lines of "Update to upstream 2.5 release" -- would >> you find that descriptive enough, or still lacking in detail? > > Perhaps add a link tot he upstream changelog, provided it is accessible > on the web? (e.g a wiki page, in their VCS viewer, etc...) > > > -- > Mathieu > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel For what though? You can google it and find it too. And on minor release versions they sometimes don't update the ChangeLog at all until the major release version. You're better off watching github commit history half the time. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 12:06 -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro > wrote: > > Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount > > of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest > > upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora > > given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be > > seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is > > where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one > > multiple times within the past couple of weeks.) > > I tend to agree here. That being said, most of my package updates are > something along the lines of "Update to upstream 2.5 release" -- would > you find that descriptive enough, or still lacking in detail? Perhaps add a link tot he upstream changelog, provided it is accessible on the web? (e.g a wiki page, in their VCS viewer, etc...) -- Mathieu -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
Adam Williamson writes: > On 11/03/13 06:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> That's not readily apparent in the Updates Policy ... > Ah, you're right, I really should have checked it before posting (yet > again). I was thinking that it discouraged *all* version updates, not > just "major" ones. I personally would still be hesitant to update a > package to a new upstream version if I didn't know what the heck was in > it, but that is indeed apparently just a personal preference and not a > policy :) I think there's no substitute for knowing your upstream --- and therefore, not a whole lot of scope for a one-size-fits-all distro-wide policy. In my case, I work mostly with upstreams that are pretty conservative about what they fix in minor releases, and I would think it irresponsible *not* to push out their minor updates into released Fedora branches. Other upstreams are a lot different though. I'm for leaving this to the package maintainer's discretion. Now, there's no harm in having the guidelines try to explain how to exercise that discretion. Maybe the existing text could use refinement. It doesn't seem that bad as it stands, though. regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:43:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> "Jared K. Smith" writes: >> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro >> > wrote: >> >> Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount >> >> of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest >> >> upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora >> >> given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be >> >> seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is >> >> where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one >> >> multiple times within the past couple of weeks.) >> >> > I tend to agree here. That being said, most of my package updates are >> > something along the lines of "Update to upstream 2.5 release" -- would >> > you find that descriptive enough, or still lacking in detail? >> >> FWIW, I tend to say "update to upstream release XYZ" and give a URL for >> the upstream release notes for that version. This approach requires an >> upstream that's well enough organized to have such a webpage for every >> version, of course; but for my packages this seems to work fine. The >> upstream notes tend to have way more info than I could cram into an >> update description, anyway. > > It'd also be great if we didn't have to duplicate changelogs > everywhere. In libguestfs, the canonical source for a change is the > git log. If I'm unlucky I may end up duplicating this three or more > times: > > - in the RPM %changelog > > - in the Fedora git commit (fedpkg commit -c helps here, thanks!) > > - in the Bodhi update > > - all of the above in the backport to the stable branch > > Even if you argue that user changelogs should be different from > developer changelogs -- and I would agree -- there's still far too > much duplication needed. > > In short my point is: don't moan about bad update messages when the > problem is our software sucks. > > Rich. > > -- > Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones > libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, > bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel I tend to agree with this. Sometimes when you are updating multiple packages at a time, it's annoying, and I'm putting update to "latest upstream version" just because I have to put something there anyways. Regardless, I usually always try to include the bug numbers I'm fixing because bodhi will auto close bugs for me. I also put it in the rpm change log. I also from my own experiencing of burning myself always test stuff in rawhide and install said RPMs (for at least MATE and stuff I am the original owner of) and do a bit of basic testing before pushing it out to released versions of Fedora. I even do scratch builds on rawhide to make sure it builds on koji as well too before committing. So yes, while it may not be descriptive, if the update includes bug numbers that the update fixes that should be good enough, including in the spec file itself I was trained to put RHBZ #'s of why I changed/added/deleted/moved something to fix a bug. With other stuff it's a bit trickier, I'm hoping that the latest upstream version fixes whatever issue the bug reporter is having and it is up to them to test it and leave positive/negative karma on bodhi to let me know if i pushed out a bad update as well. That being said, I believe that it is okay to put that in the bodhi notes + the bug numbers unless there is some other reason to put something more specific, especially when you are pushing out 10-20 (times 2 for each Fedora release) updates at a time. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 05:04 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 11.03.13 21:45, Nicolas Mailhot (nicolas.mail...@laposte.net) wrote: Le Lun 11 mars 2013 21:16, Lennart Poettering a écrit : On Mon, 11.03.13 13:08, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote: On Mar 11, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Björn Persson wrote: Or nothing at all displayed unless the user happens to know to press some key at the right moment? A multiboot system needs at least a message to inform the user how to get to the boot manager (the GRUB menu). A Fedora only system probably should entirely suppress the menu or notice how to get to it. Somebody who is capable of installing multiple operating systems on one machine should easily be savvy enough to remember that pressing shift/esc/space/f2/whatever gets him the boot menu. If you installed multiple OSes and noticed that the boot menu is gone, wouldn't pressing these keys be your natural reaction anyway? My natural reaction would be to curse whoever is making me waste minutes in press-random-keys-to-see-if-you-can-unlock-boot games to "win" a few seconds. I'm pretty sure any poll would find the same result. My natural reaction to the current grub2 menu that steals my boot is that I start to hate Fedora and Linux for that we waste our time in ugly boot menus and bikeshedding about them. Lennart How many times do you boot a day? If it is more than once or twice I would posit that is not the normal user. So what is 2 extra seconds? -- Stephen Clark *NetWolves* Director of Technology Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com http://www.netwolves.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On 11/03/13 06:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:15:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: At the very least, if you're doing an update for a stable release (so okay, Branched is an exception here), you should have a clear reason for doing it. You're not supposed to bump to the latest upstream release just Because It's There: that's against the update policy. AIUI, in the theoretical situation you describe, the maintainer should not be issuing an update at all. That's not readily apparent in the Updates Policy: Package maintainers MUST: Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all possible. Avoid changing the user experience if at all possible. Avoid updates that are trivial or don't affect any Fedora users. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#All_other_updates You could maybe define it as falling under the last of those items but someone could argue equally hard for the reverse. You'd need an actual example of an update and what the maintainer was thinking when they pushed it to map out the territory. Ah, you're right, I really should have checked it before posting (yet again). I was thinking that it discouraged *all* version updates, not just "major" ones. I personally would still be hesitant to update a package to a new upstream version if I didn't know what the heck was in it, but that is indeed apparently just a personal preference and not a policy :) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:15:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > At the very least, if you're doing an update for a stable release (so > okay, Branched is an exception here), you should have a clear reason > for doing it. You're not supposed to bump to the latest upstream > release just Because It's There: that's against the update policy. > AIUI, in the theoretical situation you describe, the maintainer > should not be issuing an update at all. That's not readily apparent in the Updates Policy: Package maintainers MUST: Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all possible. Avoid changing the user experience if at all possible. Avoid updates that are trivial or don't affect any Fedora users. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#All_other_updates You could maybe define it as falling under the last of those items but someone could argue equally hard for the reverse. You'd need an actual example of an update and what the maintainer was thinking when they pushed it to map out the territory. -Toshio pgpsEqb85bPU3.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On 11/03/13 08:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: Since switching to Fedora I've been noticing most Fedora stable updates are released with a short, helpful description of the update, possibly including a list of bugs fixed, just like in other major distros. But unlike other major distros, other updates have less helpful descriptions: * "Update to latest upstream version" * "No update information available" * "Here is where you give an explanation of your update. Here is where you give an explanation of your update." Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one multiple times within the past couple of weeks.) I'm not suggesting essays, but at least a unique sentence fragment would be good for each update. Please? :-) The discussion seems to have branched out a bit, but going back to Michael's original mail, he's clearly onto something. It should not be too hard for Bodhi to reject: * Entirely empty update descriptions * An update description which is simply the placeholder text and I can't see any reason why we shouldn't just do that. Luke, could we make it so? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On 11/03/13 09:45 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: - Original Message - On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one multiple times within the past couple of weeks.) I tend to agree here. That being said, most of my package updates are something along the lines of "Update to upstream 2.5 release" -- would you find that descriptive enough, or still lacking in detail? From the time, Kevin sent me a message in a style of "One more such update description and I'll will come to Brno to k*ll you" I'm trying to provide better description. But it really depends on quality of upstream Changelogs. Sometimes it's just really hard to write more than "update to latest upstream version x.y" :( At the very least, if you're doing an update for a stable release (so okay, Branched is an exception here), you should have a clear reason for doing it. You're not supposed to bump to the latest upstream release just Because It's There: that's against the update policy. AIUI, in the theoretical situation you describe, the maintainer should not be issuing an update at all. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: f18-64: Video Resolution problem on a netbook ASUS 1225C-GRY015U
On 11/03/13 08:47 AM, Dario Lesca wrote: Il giorno lun, 11/03/2013 alle 14.41 +, Matthew Garrett ha scritto: Question: there is some way to resolve the high CPU usage of gnome-shell and change the video resolution when projector is connect? No. The gma500 devices have no worthwhile free driver support. Thanks Matthew, this is what I was afraid. There is some workaround? or other driver to use? Not any more, no. Your most viable option is to sell it to some other poor schmuck and get a different laptop. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: twinkle: Intent to retire
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Has Fedora *ever* had a functional soft-phone? I ask this because I > have tried many, and none of them *ever* worked -- in the usual sense > that one would expect a phone to work, ie. not hanging or crashing or > dropping calls or having massive opaque configurations. I've successfully used Twinkle for the last three or four years, despite its bitrot and lack of updates from upstream. I *once* had Ekiga working, but it gave me so many problems a few years ago that I had given up on it. Sounds like it's time to get it working again, or try to get some of the next generation open-source softphones compiling for Fedora and then packaged. > I'm now using a Polycom IP phone and it's great. Just works. Best £0 > I ever spent (Red Hat bought it for me). I have a whole zoo of hardware IP phones (and am willing to donate phones to a good home!) too, but I spend enough time on the road that a softphone is nice to have as well. -- Jared Smith -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Requesting assistance with packaging a web app: wikindx
On 11/03/13 10:19 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:04:17 +1100 Ankur Sinha wrote: On Sun, 2013-03-10 at 23:22 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: You should take a look at mediawiki[1]. It stores its files in /usr/share/mediawiki and provides scripts for creating new wikis. The scripts reference a list of wikis in /etc/mediawiki. Instead of copies the new wikis are symbolic links so that package updates are seamless. [1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/mediawiki.git/tree/ Hi Michael, I'll go through the package. Thank you for the quick reply. I'm not fully sure I would call mediawiki a good example. ;) There's: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Web_Applications and to expand on that, you should have the vast majority of the files in /usr/share/ and only those files that are config or otherwise change be in /etc and linked to the share versions. Wordpress might be another example. No-one's answered the simplest part of the question yet :) You can make httpd 'use the files in /usr/share' simply by including a config snippet in /etc/httpd/conf.d/ . As Kevin suggests, Wordpress is a decent example, but roundcubemail's happens to be even simpler. Just to do the directory thing, all it really needs is something like this: Alias /roundcubemail /usr/share/roundcubemail i.e. /roundcubemail under the web server root is /usr/share/roundcubemail on the local file system. The mediawiki approach isn't really appropriate for a simple webapp. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
A suggestion: Should we let users to specify the grub2 sequence or key pressing after the installation before reboot? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 11.03.13 17:53, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > > Okay, right. The problem with that is, though, that users won't know > > what it is, which is why maybe it's better to accept across a bunch of > > different keys? (This makes sense right?) > > Yes, that's what I was suggesting. Maybe accept any of Shift, Esc, or F8 > to get into the boot menu. I don't like Space too much for this, because > it is too easy to buttdial it, but the others are probably things people > would try on their own if the wonder what it might be. Knowing that ↑ and ↓ are used to select entries in the Grub menu I'd probably try those. I might try Enter if I didn't know that it boots the selected entry in Grub. Next I might try all the F keys in sequence, or Insert and Delete since some BIOSes use those. I probably wouldn't think of Shift or Ctrl as those usually have no effect on their own. Esc seems counterintuitive because "escape" means to get out of something and I want to get *into* the bootloader. Now that I think about it the Pause/Break key seems the most logical. Pause the boot process is what I want to do after all. But that's me. Others might try Space or some letter or whatever. To ensure that everything people will try will work it will have to be so many keys that it can just as well be all of them. I fail to see how "buttdialing" would be a significant problem. Could you explain why you think people are likely to press random keys by mistake during the boot? I don't think that has ever happened to me. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposal: Rawhide tracker bug
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:50:53PM -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > > - bugs that break the rawhide buildroot. In practice these are > > usually > > noticed pretty quickly and the offending build is just untagged > > until > > it can be fixed, but there could be cases where the fix is more > > complex and has a bug associated with it. > > For those of us who are not skilled in building a release, what does this > exactly mean? I can imagine bugs that prevent compose (no package repo > created), but this one could deserve a closer explanation. Whenever libguestfs FTBFS in Rawhide because the current Rawhide userspace doesn't boot during the tests, I'd attach my bug to this one. Thankfully autotest is making this problem rarer these days. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:55 PM, Ian Malone wrote: > On 11 March 2013 20:43, drago01 wrote: >> >> If you really want to menu hold down any key. > > Kernel update breaks system. User ignorant of hold-down key approach > is stuck. Menu at least advertises possibility of alternative. This logic doesn't work. The user ignorant of holding down even random keys, let alone what will become a common knowledge key, is also ignorant of the existence of a boot menu, and even more ignorant of the notion they need to choose a prior kernel. Kernel updates breaking systems is uniquely linux. Multiple kernel versions installed per system is also uniquely linux. Neither Windows nor OS X have these things. If you know about such troubleshooting methods, you know you need a menu. So you're going to try various keys, knowing you need to get a GRUB menu. By the way, with Fedora 18, Recovery options in the Advanced submenu are now suppressed. So users need to know how to edit GRUB entries to get to single user, emergency or rescue modes, as a troubleshoot method. This is obscure. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unhelpful update descriptions
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:43:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jared K. Smith" writes: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro > > wrote: > >> Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount > >> of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest > >> upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora > >> given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be > >> seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is > >> where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one > >> multiple times within the past couple of weeks.) > > > I tend to agree here. That being said, most of my package updates are > > something along the lines of "Update to upstream 2.5 release" -- would > > you find that descriptive enough, or still lacking in detail? > > FWIW, I tend to say "update to upstream release XYZ" and give a URL for > the upstream release notes for that version. This approach requires an > upstream that's well enough organized to have such a webpage for every > version, of course; but for my packages this seems to work fine. The > upstream notes tend to have way more info than I could cram into an > update description, anyway. It'd also be great if we didn't have to duplicate changelogs everywhere. In libguestfs, the canonical source for a change is the git log. If I'm unlucky I may end up duplicating this three or more times: - in the RPM %changelog - in the Fedora git commit (fedpkg commit -c helps here, thanks!) - in the Bodhi update - all of the above in the backport to the stable branch Even if you argue that user changelogs should be different from developer changelogs -- and I would agree -- there's still far too much duplication needed. In short my point is: don't moan about bad update messages when the problem is our software sucks. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Non responsive state for systemd
On 11/03/13 22:57, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:28:47AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> True thing. libselinux is a library we really really should avoid >>> linking against. >> >> Why the sarcasm? SELinux and libselinux only ever cause problems, why can't >> we finally kick them out of Fedora? > > This is a tad unfair. SELinux is (more than theoretically) a last > line of defence against some exploits, and for at least a few years > I've been able to run my laptop with SELinux set to enforcing, only > disabling it occasionally to do specific tasks or when investigating > permissions problems. > > Rich. I agree. Years ago pretty much every single Fedora guide would recommend disabling SELinux, but these days (after years of refining the default policy) SELinux is rock solid and usually just stays out of the way. -- Jamie Nguyen -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: twinkle: Intent to retire
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 11:53:00AM -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > On 03/09/2013 12:08 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > So, I am going to retire this package in rawhide soon unless there's > > folks with a very strong C++ background wishing to fix issues and > > basically become the new upstream. > > Does Fedora currently have a functional soft-phone? Has Fedora *ever* had a functional soft-phone? I ask this because I have tried many, and none of them *ever* worked -- in the usual sense that one would expect a phone to work, ie. not hanging or crashing or dropping calls or having massive opaque configurations. I'm now using a Polycom IP phone and it's great. Just works. Best £0 I ever spent (Red Hat bought it for me). Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:58:55PM +0100, Bj??rn Persson wrote: > Ryan Lerch wrote: > > I think the suggestion in this thread is to simply keep a key *pressed > > down* that way there are no issues with the user having to time a keypress. > > And I'm asking: How am I supposed to *discover* that I'm supposed to be > holding a key down and not pounding on it? > > Could there at least be some instructions displayed *after* I > accidentally succeed the first time, so I'll know how to do it next > time? Also could it react if *any* key is pressed? There's tons of keys that are used for bootloader or bios (which to the end user is pretty similar) I've personally seen [ESC] [F1] [F2] [F3] [F5] [F11] [F12] [DEL] [HOME] [Ctrl] and even [b]. Making it go to a menu if any key is pressed makes one thing less of a mess to discover. -Toshio pgpReeSlSs_5A.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Non responsive state for systemd
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:28:47AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Lennart Poettering wrote: > > True thing. libselinux is a library we really really should avoid > > linking against. > > Why the sarcasm? SELinux and libselinux only ever cause problems, why can't > we finally kick them out of Fedora? This is a tad unfair. SELinux is (more than theoretically) a last line of defence against some exploits, and for at least a few years I've been able to run my laptop with SELinux set to enforcing, only disabling it occasionally to do specific tasks or when investigating permissions problems. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 15:47, Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) wrote: > On 11/03/13 01:20 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > >Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and > > While we're trading anecdata, mine takes at least 10 seconds, and > often appears to run twice for absolutely no good reason. Get any Windows 8 certified HW and you'll get POST < 2s, because that's required for the logo certification. In real life you even get much better than that. For example Samsung Ultrabooks (the infamous ones) are much faster and achieve ~500ms for POST. See "Windows 8 System Requirements", section "System.Fundamentals.Firmware.UEFIPostTime": http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh748188.aspx Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 11 March 2013 20:43, drago01 wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Björn Persson > wrote: >> Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> > If some text like "Press Esc now to choose which operating system to >>> > boot." would be displayed, then the pause would need to be long enough >>> > for the user to read and understand the instruction and then reach for >>> > the right key – and the terser the text is made the harder it will be to >>> > understand. I estimate that at least 15 seconds would be needed. Adding >>> > "Press Enter to save a few seconds." would make it even more text to >>> > read and understand. >>> >>> Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and >>> kernel+userspace in 2s. And you want us to spend 15s for nothing in the >>> boot loader, for a feature only the fewest people need, and those who >>> need anyway know how to get? >> >> No, those 15 seconds were my argument for why it should NOT be done >> that way. As I already wrote, if the Grub menu is simply displayed, >> then five seconds is enough. Much better. And if you want to save those >> five seconds you just need to press Enter. > > I'd argue "saving this 5 seconds" is more common than wanting to mess > with the grub menu (maybe unless you dual boot). > So if the only OS is fedora, we should just boot. > > If you really want to menu hold down any key. Kernel update breaks system. User ignorant of hold-down key approach is stuck. Menu at least advertises possibility of alternative. -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] [FINAL NOTICE] Retiring packages for Fedora 19
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:49:50PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > ocaml-lablgtk-0:2.16.0-2.fc19.x86_64 This happens because of the dependency chain via gtksourceview. ocaml-lablgtk (Gtk bindings for OCaml) doesn't absolutely require gtksourceview; it's just an enhancement that could be disabled using ./configure --without-gtksourceview. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 11/03/13 01:20 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and While we're trading anecdata, mine takes at least 10 seconds, and often appears to run twice for absolutely no good reason. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:31 PM, seth vidal wrote: > On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:24:28 -0600 > Chris Murphy wrote: >>> >>> If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have >>> gotten this far. >> >> >> Please elaborate on this, and define "this far". Apple has had fairly >> opaque booting for ~28 years, so I'm curious how much farther they >> need to go. > > > 'this far' - developing an os. Developing an OS without > closed/restricted/special access to professional documentation on the > platform. This is not elaboration as much as it is obfuscation. You appear to be suggesting that OSS wouldn't have happened had boot process details been hidden from users, by default, all these years. I don't see the relationship, at all, between OSS and personally experiencing the details of the boot process burning my retinas. > Apple builds their own hw and can hire people to work on their problems > with their infinite pile of money. The decision to hide the details of the boot process from the user occurred in a garage over 30 years ago. > We need to recruit people into being interested in linux. The way to do that is to beat them over the head with GRUB by making the details of the boot process visible by default? Please explain why I'm interested in linux file systems, despite never having seen any evidence of such file systems during the boot/startup process. > > Take a look at the age demographic of a lot of linux kernel/distribution > maintenance folks. We're skewing to an older cohort. We need to make it > possible for others to be involved. Because the only way for people to be involved is if they actually see everything on every boot? I don't even understand what you're talking bout anymore, it's become incoherent. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 17:53, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > On 03/11/2013 05:44 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Mon, 11.03.13 17:24, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > > > >>> Having multiple triggers for this sounds OK, but making all keys > >>> triggers for this sounds suboptimal, since you might "buttdial" the boot > >>> menu then, which sounds suboptimal. > >> > >> Lennart, what you're suggesting is if the user presses the appropriate > >> F-key too early, they'd end up in the BIOS menu instead of the GRUB > >> menu? Is that really that big of an issue - the type of users who'd > >> want > > > > The firmware setup is something hw specific, and usually something like > > F12. But in our boot loader we could just pick any random key and show the > > boot > > menu if we notice that key is pressed while we go through the boot > > menu. That random key could be shift, or space or enter, or esc, or F8, > > or Shift+F8, or whatever. > > Okay, right. The problem with that is, though, that users won't know > what it is, which is why maybe it's better to accept across a bunch of > different keys? (This makes sense right?) Yes, that's what I was suggesting. Maybe accept any of Shift, Esc, or F8 to get into the boot menu. I don't like Space too much for this, because it is too easy to buttdial it, but the others are probably things people would try on their own if the wonder what it might be. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:56 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Basically do what Lennart has been suggesting along with borrowing from OS X > to play an sound ( startup tone ) when you should press a ( startup ) key but > have very limited key combo, if anything other then a single keypress to get > you to that "advanced startup" mode/target. The startup chime on Apple hardware is done by the firmware. It happens regardless of the OS installed. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 09:33 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: Hi Jóhann, These are great links, thanks!! So to summarize: On 03/11/2013 05:11 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: 1. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/22/designing-for-pcs-that-boot-faster-than-ever-before.aspx The last case these guys go over is the one we care about. They consolidated all the options into a single 'boot options' menu. Their solution is instead of triggering the boot options menu during boot, that you click on a button in the desktop UI that reboots you into 'advanced startup' mode which shows the boot menu by default. Sounds like the most elegant solution and should be used as a fallback/rescue mode encase something comes up for desktops. Basically do what Lennart has been suggesting along with borrowing from OS X to play an sound ( startup tone ) when you should press a ( startup ) key but have very limited key combo, if anything other then a single keypress to get you to that "advanced startup" mode/target. 2. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1533 They appear to have an entire menagerie of keys you can press during startup to access various modes and controls. Seems very un-Apple like though to have so many different modes... Here's a more complete list [1] kinda shows that to many key-combo options at bootup aint that pretty:) *1. http://face.centosprime.com/macosxw/startup-keys-boot-options/* -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Björn Persson wrote: > Chris Murphy wrote: >> A multiboot system needs at least a message to inform the user how to get to >> the boot manager (the GRUB menu). A Fedora only system probably should >> entirely suppress the menu or notice how to get to it. > > What if I need to revert to the previous kernel, or add some kernel > parameter to get the system up enough to solve some boot problem? This is debugging territory, not normal usage. You need a key to press to cause the boot manager menu to be displayed. That's my expectation. Not to end up in debug territory when nothing is wrong, which should be the majority case. If your primary task involves debugging, it's reasonable for you to change the default hide menu behavior so that you always see if if you wish. Subjecting most users to this experience for a production quality OS is unreasonable. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > On 03/11/2013 05:44 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> That random key could be shift, or space or enter, or esc, or F8, >> or Shift+F8, or whatever. > > Okay, right. The problem with that is, though, that users won't know > what it is, which is why maybe it's better to accept across a bunch of > different keys? (This makes sense right?) Whatever is decided, I think it should be proposed via the BootLoaderSpec project, so that there's some hope of distributions agreeing on the keys. This is exactly the sort of linux Ux fragmentation that I find user hostile, rather than anything about freedom (well, except freedom to be different for no good reason and thus user hostile). http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/BootLoaderSpec Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Ryan Lerch wrote: > I think the suggestion in this thread is to simply keep a key *pressed > down* that way there are no issues with the user having to time a keypress. And I'm asking: How am I supposed to *discover* that I'm supposed to be holding a key down and not pounding on it? Could there at least be some instructions displayed *after* I accidentally succeed the first time, so I'll know how to do it next time? Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > >> >> 2. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1533 > > They appear to have an entire menagerie of keys you can press during > startup to access various modes and controls. Seems very un-Apple like > though to have so many different modes… The vast majority have been around over 10 years. Seems very Apple like to me. command-P-R, mouse button, shift, have been around since the original Macs almost three decades ago, witih the same meanings. Option and C were added with CD-ROMs. T was added with Firewire devices. N and option-N arrived with network boot support, OpenFirmware. command-v and command-s arrived with OS X 14 years ago. D added with Intel/EFI. command-R added most recently with the addition of a Recovery HD volume (used for network restore of the OS, repair of the primary volume, and booting when the primary volume is encrypted) I'm pretty sure the only three in the list that aren't firmware features are command-v, command-s, and shift which are kernel features (in effect are kernel parameters). Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 05:44 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 11.03.13 17:24, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > >>> Having multiple triggers for this sounds OK, but making all keys >>> triggers for this sounds suboptimal, since you might "buttdial" the boot >>> menu then, which sounds suboptimal. >> >> Lennart, what you're suggesting is if the user presses the appropriate >> F-key too early, they'd end up in the BIOS menu instead of the GRUB >> menu? Is that really that big of an issue - the type of users who'd >> want > > The firmware setup is something hw specific, and usually something like > F12. But in our boot loader we could just pick any random key and show the > boot > menu if we notice that key is pressed while we go through the boot > menu. That random key could be shift, or space or enter, or esc, or F8, > or Shift+F8, or whatever. Okay, right. The problem with that is, though, that users won't know what it is, which is why maybe it's better to accept across a bunch of different keys? (This makes sense right?) ~m -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 05:01 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > By hooking this up to keys people would natrually try, such as shift, > space, enter, escape, or whatever windows does for their boot menu stuff. FWIW Windows uses F8 ~m -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Lennart Poettering wrote: > (And on EFI systems that do not initialize USB anymore during POST, you > have to go through the OS to get into the boot loader anyway...) That's going to be real fun when the OS fails to boot, and I can't fix the boot because I can't get into the boot loader because the OS fails to boot. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 17:24, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > > Having multiple triggers for this sounds OK, but making all keys > > triggers for this sounds suboptimal, since you might "buttdial" the boot > > menu then, which sounds suboptimal. > > Lennart, what you're suggesting is if the user presses the appropriate > F-key too early, they'd end up in the BIOS menu instead of the GRUB > menu? Is that really that big of an issue - the type of users who'd > want The firmware setup is something hw specific, and usually something like F12. But in our boot loader we could just pick any random key and show the boot menu if we notice that key is pressed while we go through the boot menu. That random key could be shift, or space or enter, or esc, or F8, or Shift+F8, or whatever. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:13 PM, seth vidal wrote: > I want to encourage kids, teenagers, etc to explore the OS. We need > them to be involved in CREATING and LEARNING. So I don't want to scare > any of them off. Search this thread for my battery acid comment. Learning about booting linux has made me think of creating and learning things that have absolutely nothing to do with computers. Most of the time, I actually have work to do, and really don't need an attention needy bootloader announcing its desire to be stroked and learned. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] [FINAL NOTICE] Retiring packages for Fedora 19
2013/3/11 Bill Nottingham > Package email2trac (fails to build) > Added myself to the package, waiting for approval. - Thomas -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:34:28 -0400 Ryan Lerch wrote: > I think the suggestion in this thread is to simply keep a key > *pressed down* that way there are no issues with the user having to > time a keypress. Having a key pressed down helps, also, with Accessibility for folks with precise timing issues in motor control. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 04:30 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > The OLPC doesn't use grub in any shape for form. It used Open Firmware > to boot straight to the kernel. Thanks, but I'm aware of the software used. My comment was to give Seth an example about what some distros (one that you help design) show users see when they boot. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 05:30 PM, Björn Persson wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 11.03.13 21:20, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: Peter Robinson wrote: It use to only be displayed if there was more than one OS configured or if the CTRL was held down. Having to press a particular key means you have to get it at the second or two where grub isn't displayed. The Ctrl option is quite nice as you can do it before the BIOS disappears. But how are users supposed to discover it? By hooking this up to keys people would natrually try, such as shift, space, enter, escape, or whatever windows does for their boot menu stuff. I would probably pound frantically on the keyboard trying to hit the right key during some unknown, short interval. If there were no interval at all and the right solution were to be holding a key at the right moment, then I'd probably have about a 50% chance of not pressing any key at that moment. And after I happened to press the right key at the right moment I still wouldn't know which of the keys I pressed was the right one, so I'd have to pound frantically the next time too. After a few iterations I'd also be cursing the idiots who designed such an unfriendly user interface just because they didn't want any text on the screen. Björn Persson I think the suggestion in this thread is to simply keep a key *pressed down* that way there are no issues with the user having to time a keypress. --ryanlerch -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Hi Jóhann, These are great links, thanks!! So to summarize: On 03/11/2013 05:11 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > 1. > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/22/designing-for-pcs-that-boot-faster-than-ever-before.aspx The last case these guys go over is the one we care about. They consolidated all the options into a single 'boot options' menu. Their solution is instead of triggering the boot options menu during boot, that you click on a button in the desktop UI that reboots you into 'advanced startup' mode which shows the boot menu by default. > > 2. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1533 They appear to have an entire menagerie of keys you can press during startup to access various modes and controls. Seems very un-Apple like though to have so many different modes... ~m -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 22:30, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: > Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Mon, 11.03.13 21:20, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: > > > > > Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > It use to only be displayed if there was more than one OS configured > > > > or if the CTRL was held down. Having to press a particular key means > > > > you have to get it at the second or two where grub isn't displayed. > > > > The Ctrl option is quite nice as you can do it before the BIOS > > > > disappears. > > > > > > But how are users supposed to discover it? > > > > By hooking this up to keys people would natrually try, such as shift, > > space, enter, escape, or whatever windows does for their boot menu stuff. > > I would probably pound frantically on the keyboard trying to hit the > right key during some unknown, short interval. If there were no > interval at all and the right solution were to be holding a key at the > right moment, then I'd probably have about a 50% chance of not pressing > any key at that moment. Gummiboot is happy if you simply keep them pressed all the time. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:24:28 -0600 Chris Murphy wrote: > > > > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > > gotten this far. > > > Please elaborate on this, and define "this far". Apple has had fairly > opaque booting for ~28 years, so I'm curious how much farther they > need to go. 'this far' - developing an os. Developing an OS without closed/restricted/special access to professional documentation on the platform. Apple builds their own hw and can hire people to work on their problems with their infinite pile of money. We need to recruit people into being interested in linux. Take a look at the age demographic of a lot of linux kernel/distribution maintenance folks. We're skewing to an older cohort. We need to make it possible for others to be involved. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 03/11/2013 04:13 PM, seth vidal wrote: >> I want to encourage kids, teenagers, etc to explore the OS. We need >> them to be involved in CREATING and LEARNING. So I don't want to scare >> any of them off. > > My OLPC does not present any boot menu or prompt. The OLPC doesn't use grub in any shape for form. It used Open Firmware to boot straight to the kernel. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 11.03.13 21:20, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: > > > Peter Robinson wrote: > > > It use to only be displayed if there was more than one OS configured > > > or if the CTRL was held down. Having to press a particular key means > > > you have to get it at the second or two where grub isn't displayed. > > > The Ctrl option is quite nice as you can do it before the BIOS > > > disappears. > > > > But how are users supposed to discover it? > > By hooking this up to keys people would natrually try, such as shift, > space, enter, escape, or whatever windows does for their boot menu stuff. I would probably pound frantically on the keyboard trying to hit the right key during some unknown, short interval. If there were no interval at all and the right solution were to be holding a key at the right moment, then I'd probably have about a 50% chance of not pressing any key at that moment. And after I happened to press the right key at the right moment I still wouldn't know which of the keys I pressed was the right one, so I'd have to pound frantically the next time too. After a few iterations I'd also be cursing the idiots who designed such an unfriendly user interface just because they didn't want any text on the screen. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 05:24 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Right, because had booting simply worked, instead of a** r8H#@Ig me every 10 > minutes, I'd never have become curious about it. Do you remember the days when bootup was so slow that you would sit there for 3-5 minutes watching the ram count up? The old family computer (IBM XT) had 640 KB of ram. It would pretty much count up the RAM by powers of two on startup. I watched that start-up so many times during my childhood it later on became a distinct advantage in math class to have the powers of two memorized up that high :) As educational as that was, I do very much enjoy not having to wait quite so long :) Especially since my computer has 8 GB of RAM now. ~m -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: New cfitsio (3.330) in rawhide
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:01:12 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> Another option which I employ with the opencollada library is to use
> arbitrary soversioning. Upstream not only doesn't use library versions
> but doesn't use ANY versioning.
>
> I started at 0.1 or something like that and when I build a new package
> I check compatibility with abi-compliance-checker. If it's not found
> to be compatible, I bump the soversion macro in the spec file before
> doing an official build.
Sure, that's something that can help avoiding unnecessary rebuilds.
However, elsewhere in this thread, Sergio has mentioned that cfitsio
contains a run-time check to enforce that an application was built with
exactly the same headers as the library itself. Indeed it does that when
opening files.
$ grep CFITSIO_VERSION * -R
cfileio.c:if (version != CFITSIO_VERSION)
cfileio.c: printf(" Version used to build the CFITSIO library =
%f\n",CFITSIO_VERSION);
fitsio.h:#define CFITSIO_VERSION 3.33
longnam.h:#define fits_open_file(A, B, C, D)
ffopentest( CFITSIO_VERSION, A, B, C, D)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 09:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 11.03.13 17:05, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: Hi Seth, On 03/11/2013 04:20 PM, seth vidal wrote: I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want people to poke and prod around. If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have gotten this far. How do you feel about Ryan's suggestion to make grub appear on any key press (instead of having it mapped to any one specific key?) Having multiple triggers for this sounds OK, but making all keys triggers for this sounds suboptimal, since you might "buttdial" the boot menu then, which sounds suboptimal. OS X plays a sound ( startup tone ) when you should press as ( startup ) key which sounds like something we should "borrow". JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 09:05 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: Hi Seth, On 03/11/2013 04:20 PM, seth vidal wrote: I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want people to poke and prod around. If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have gotten this far. How do you feel about Ryan's suggestion to make grub appear on any key press (instead of having it mapped to any one specific key?) ~m A bit of info why and how M$ handles this [1] And here is Apple OS X [2] 1. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/22/designing-for-pcs-that-boot-faster-than-ever-before.aspx 2. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1533 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:20 PM, seth vidal wrote: > On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:07:32 +0100 > Lennart Poettering wrote: >> >> Entering the boot loader is something that is a debugging feature, a >> tool for professionals. > > I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. > > We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want people > to poke and prod around. Right, because had booting simply worked, instead of a** r8H#@Ig me every 10 minutes, I'd never have become curious about it. > > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > gotten this far. Please elaborate on this, and define "this far". Apple has had fairly opaque booting for ~28 years, so I'm curious how much farther they need to go. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 22:14, Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 09:09:46PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > We are working on this in the systemd context. We will provide a tiny > > mechanism, similar to localed/timedated/hostnamed that can be used by > > desktop UIs to choose "boot into firmware", and "boot into other OS" > > features, which can then be exposed on the shutdown button in the UI, or > > in some configuration applet thingy or wherever the desktop UI wants to > > put it. > > Would the systemd feature also allow to for example boot the default > kernel but allow to display a menu in parallel that can be used to boot > a different kernel by reconfiguring the boot loader and initiating a > reboot? Then it is possible to get both, nearly zero boot delay and a > boot menu. The machanism will certainly not "reconfigure" the boot loader. It will pass additional information tot he boot loader or BIOS via EFI vars or so, where that's available, but certainly not muck with the boot loader. Whatever the mechanism does, you can always override everything from the boot menu, just by pressing shift or whatever is necessary. The systemd mechanism only gives the BIOS/boot loader *hints* that it would be cool to do something on next reboot, like for example enter the firmware setup, or boot into a specific OS, but the user should always be empowered to do whatever he wants to do if the machine reboots. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 05:13 PM, seth vidal wrote: > Is one line of text really that significant of a problem to present? I'm pretty sure it is because of where we are in the process at that point. For example, translations - can we render Indic or CJK glyphs to the screen at this point in the boot process? I'm not quite sure that's possible? Another thing with translations is they take up additional disk space and I think (don't quote me on this, maybe Peter or one of the other grub experts could speak up) grub2 is a bit chubby compared to grub, but its space usage is a concern so to not have to have all the translation files for the languages we support would definitely be good. (grub2's girth is one of the reasons - on upstream's recommendation - that we don't allow installing the bootloader to a partition now.) The other thing is that if you have to flash grub to display a message, then you are flashing grub for everybody, which kind of defeats the point of speeding up the boot process and making it look cleaner without the black flashing screens in the background. (Does that make sense? It seems everytime a new program loads in the beginning the screen kind of blanks out and flashes inbetween. If we could skip displaying grub by default then it'd eliminate two flashes) I will say in the past, when asked to fix someone's Mac notebook (heaven knows why they asked *me*), it was a real struggle to figure out what the various bootup hotkeys were and when to trigger them to get into various startup settings - they aren't documented very well by Apple or so was the case some years ago. Also, different BIOSes have different F keys you have to press to get into the startup disk settings - I remember by the end of the 10 session Girl Scouts class I did in a lab full of donated hardware (IBM, HP, Dell, and Gateway systems) I knew by heart each one's hot key to get into the BIOS settings (and they were annoyingly different for each system type!) So frustrating... Anyway, this is why I like Ryan's idea of having a wide range of keys you could press to enter it. (I usually start with Esc or F12 and go from there.) If Esc, F1-F12, and maybe enter, space, ctrl, alt, and the letters worked, that should be sufficient? > Having multiple triggers for this sounds OK, but making all keys > triggers for this sounds suboptimal, since you might "buttdial" the boot > menu then, which sounds suboptimal. Lennart, what you're suggesting is if the user presses the appropriate F-key too early, they'd end up in the BIOS menu instead of the GRUB menu? Is that really that big of an issue - the type of users who'd want to access GRUB are probably not going to be terrified by a BIOS menu anyway, right? The problem with not using the F-keys is that I thought grub traditionally used an F key (was it F3?) to get into if the timeout was set to 0? (or am I misremembering?) Some BIOSes use F3 for the boot menu, so those people would be at risk for buttdialing no matter what :) ~m -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:18:33 -0500 Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 03/11/2013 04:13 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > I want to encourage kids, teenagers, etc to explore the OS. We need > > them to be involved in CREATING and LEARNING. So I don't want to > > scare any of them off. > > My OLPC does not present any boot menu or prompt. That's not an argument for why we should not present one. It is an argument for why they should be. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 04:13 PM, seth vidal wrote: > I want to encourage kids, teenagers, etc to explore the OS. We need > them to be involved in CREATING and LEARNING. So I don't want to scare > any of them off. My OLPC does not present any boot menu or prompt. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 09:09:46PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > We are working on this in the systemd context. We will provide a tiny > mechanism, similar to localed/timedated/hostnamed that can be used by > desktop UIs to choose "boot into firmware", and "boot into other OS" > features, which can then be exposed on the shutdown button in the UI, or > in some configuration applet thingy or wherever the desktop UI wants to > put it. Would the systemd feature also allow to for example boot the default kernel but allow to display a menu in parallel that can be used to boot a different kernel by reconfiguring the boot loader and initiating a reboot? Then it is possible to get both, nearly zero boot delay and a boot menu. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 11.03.13 20:22, Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) wrote: > >> > Entering the boot loader is something that is a debugging feature, a >> > tool for professionals. It shouldn't be too hard to expect from them to >> > remember something as simple as maybe "press shift or Space or Esc" to >> > get the boot menu or more verbose output. I mean, honestly, that's >> > probably what most people would try automatically anyway if they want >> > feedback from the machine. >> > >> > We nowadays live in times where BIOS POST takes 500ms, the kernel one >> > second and userspace another one [1], with times like that you really >> > don't need any bootsplash or anything. With Windows 8 the laptop BIOSes >> > finally got fixed to be silent and quick during POST. Now its our turn >> > to achieve the same for the boot loader and the OS, both of which we >> > control. >> >> Clearly you haven't used any modern EFI server systems where I've used >> systems which take 15 minutes to post (and I can kickstart an entire >> RHEL-6 install less than 7 mins) and are generally longer than their >> predecessors > > Clearly, you haven't used any modern EFI laptop system where POST is > 500ms. Yep, I have one of those as well. > So, we both now pointed out that each other is terribly naive, what did > us bring that? > > Are you really arguing that because your EFI system is slow we should > make it even slower by adding pointless 15s delays into the boot > everywhere? Nope, I never said it's not something worth doing, I believe as someone who runs single Fedora systems pretty much everywhere it's worthwhile. It's also something that on my 500ms EFI booting laptop would rarely impact me as I reboot it about once a month and use suspend/resume most of the time too. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:05:31 -0400 Máirín Duffy wrote: > Hi Seth, > > On 03/11/2013 04:20 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. > > > > We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want > > people to poke and prod around. > > > > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > > gotten this far. > > How do you feel about Ryan's suggestion to make grub appear on any key > press (instead of having it mapped to any one specific key?) > My initial reaction is this: if I see a "press any key to see what's happening right now" - then I know what pressing a key will achieve. if I don't see anything like that - then I may be in for a bit of a scare. I want to encourage kids, teenagers, etc to explore the OS. We need them to be involved in CREATING and LEARNING. So I don't want to scare any of them off. Is one line of text really that significant of a problem to present? -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:16 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Somebody who is capable of installing multiple operating systems on one > machine should easily be savvy enough to remember that pressing > shift/esc/space/f2/whatever gets him the boot menu. When I said "at least" I meant "at most". > If you installed multiple OSes and noticed that the boot menu is gone, > wouldn't pressing these keys be your natural reaction anyway? With a sample size of one, apparently the answer is yes except for Esc which I did not think to try, yet is the only key GRUB responds to. Documentation says "any key". I've filed a bug. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 22:00:54 +0100 Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > > I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. > > Well, where do you get them from? Here's a hint: the Unix market is > now all ours, so you can only get them from Windows. And on Windows 8 > they don't have any pointless sleeps in the boot, and if you want a > boot menu, you have to press something. New professional get made from kids learning. From folks tinkering in basements and on their free time. It's not all structured learning. It never has been. > > We can even use the same key as windows does, if that helps you... I just want something discoverable, best if it were printed out and obvious. > > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > > gotten this far. > > Which is nonsense. Citation needed. It is not self-evidently nonsense. Please don't be this way. > Also modern EFI systems work the same way. I mean, > they are even more drastic in many cases, and don't initialize USB > kbds at all anymore, so that you have to go through the OS to get > back into boot menu. You're making an argument why EFI is trying to make computers devices that people only consume with, not devices they learn and create with. I don't think we should be encouraging this behavior just b/c others are. Your same argument could be used to justify not releasing source code, too. Please justify what you're arguing for. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 17:05, Máirín Duffy (du...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > Hi Seth, > > On 03/11/2013 04:20 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. > > > > We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want people > > to poke and prod around. > > > > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > > gotten this far. > > How do you feel about Ryan's suggestion to make grub appear on any key > press (instead of having it mapped to any one specific key?) Having multiple triggers for this sounds OK, but making all keys triggers for this sounds suboptimal, since you might "buttdial" the boot menu then, which sounds suboptimal. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Hi Seth, On 03/11/2013 04:20 PM, seth vidal wrote: > I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. > > We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want people > to poke and prod around. > > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > gotten this far. How do you feel about Ryan's suggestion to make grub appear on any key press (instead of having it mapped to any one specific key?) ~m -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 21:45, Nicolas Mailhot (nicolas.mail...@laposte.net) wrote: > > Le Lun 11 mars 2013 21:16, Lennart Poettering a écrit : > > On Mon, 11.03.13 13:08, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote: > > > >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Björn Persson > >> wrote: > >> > Or nothing at all displayed unless the user happens to know to press > >> some key at the > >> > right moment? > >> > >> A multiboot system needs at least a message to inform the user how to > >> get to the boot manager (the GRUB menu). A Fedora only system probably > >> should entirely suppress the menu or notice how to get to it. > > > > Somebody who is capable of installing multiple operating systems on one > > machine should easily be savvy enough to remember that pressing > > shift/esc/space/f2/whatever gets him the boot menu. > > > > If you installed multiple OSes and noticed that the boot menu is gone, > > wouldn't pressing these keys be your natural reaction anyway? > > My natural reaction would be to curse whoever is making me waste minutes > in press-random-keys-to-see-if-you-can-unlock-boot games to "win" a few > seconds. I'm pretty sure any poll would find the same result. My natural reaction to the current grub2 menu that steals my boot is that I start to hate Fedora and Linux for that we waste our time in ugly boot menus and bikeshedding about them. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Does any other computing device you own prompt you for a boot menu? Your > mobile phone? That's one of the reasons I've never gotten around to trying another distribution or playing with a more feature-rich kernel on my N900: I have to first find out whether and how I'll be able to revert if anything goes wrong. > Your TV (which likely has embedded Linux)? Your car? > Windows? OS X? I don't have any of those, and I doubt I'll ever buy a car when I want a general-purpose computer. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On 03/11/2013 04:56 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 11.03.13 21:40, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: If some text like "Press Esc now to choose which operating system to boot." would be displayed, then the pause would need to be long enough for the user to read and understand the instruction and then reach for the right key – and the terser the text is made the harder it will be to understand. I estimate that at least 15 seconds would be needed. Adding "Press Enter to save a few seconds." would make it even more text to read and understand. Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and kernel+userspace in 2s. And you want us to spend 15s for nothing in the boot loader, for a feature only the fewest people need, and those who need anyway know how to get? No, those 15 seconds were my argument for why it should NOT be done that way. As I already wrote, if the Grub menu is simply displayed, then five seconds is enough. Much better. And if you want to save those five seconds you just need to press Enter. No, 0s are about enough. Press some key while boot up your machine, that's fine. So just to clarify, just have a key (or keys) that need to be *held down* when you turn on your machine, that brings up GRUB? This is a great approach! --ryanlerch (And on EFI systems that do not initialize USB anymore during POST, you have to go through the OS to get into the boot loader anyway...) Lennart -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 21:20, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: > Peter Robinson wrote: > > It use to only be displayed if there was more than one OS configured > > or if the CTRL was held down. Having to press a particular key means > > you have to get it at the second or two where grub isn't displayed. > > The Ctrl option is quite nice as you can do it before the BIOS > > disappears. > > But how are users supposed to discover it? By hooking this up to keys people would natrually try, such as shift, space, enter, escape, or whatever windows does for their boot menu stuff. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 16:20, seth vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:07:32 +0100 > Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > > I don't think we should generate any message. Nothing at all. My BIOS > > doesn't print a single line, and neither does the kernel if "quiet" is > > used (which is the default). I really don't see why Plymouth or the > > boot loader should print any more -- unless a real problem happens, > > or the user explicitly asked for more, or the boot takes very long. > > > > Entering the boot loader is something that is a debugging feature, a > > tool for professionals. It shouldn't be too hard to expect from them > > to remember something as simple as maybe "press shift or Space or > > Esc" to get the boot menu or more verbose output. I mean, honestly, > > that's probably what most people would try automatically anyway if > > they want feedback from the machine. > > I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. Well, where do you get them from? Here's a hint: the Unix market is now all ours, so you can only get them from Windows. And on Windows 8 they don't have any pointless sleeps in the boot, and if you want a boot menu, you have to press something. We can even use the same key as windows does, if that helps you... > If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have > gotten this far. Which is nonsense. Also modern EFI systems work the same way. I mean, they are even more drastic in many cases, and don't initialize USB kbds at all anymore, so that you have to go through the OS to get back into boot menu. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 21:40, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: > Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > If some text like "Press Esc now to choose which operating system to > > > boot." would be displayed, then the pause would need to be long enough > > > for the user to read and understand the instruction and then reach for > > > the right key – and the terser the text is made the harder it will be to > > > understand. I estimate that at least 15 seconds would be needed. Adding > > > "Press Enter to save a few seconds." would make it even more text to > > > read and understand. > > > > Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and > > kernel+userspace in 2s. And you want us to spend 15s for nothing in the > > boot loader, for a feature only the fewest people need, and those who > > need anyway know how to get? > > No, those 15 seconds were my argument for why it should NOT be done > that way. As I already wrote, if the Grub menu is simply displayed, > then five seconds is enough. Much better. And if you want to save those > five seconds you just need to press Enter. No, 0s are about enough. Press some key while boot up your machine, that's fine. (And on EFI systems that do not initialize USB anymore during POST, you have to go through the OS to get into the boot loader anyway...) Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 20:22, Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Entering the boot loader is something that is a debugging feature, a > > tool for professionals. It shouldn't be too hard to expect from them to > > remember something as simple as maybe "press shift or Space or Esc" to > > get the boot menu or more verbose output. I mean, honestly, that's > > probably what most people would try automatically anyway if they want > > feedback from the machine. > > > > We nowadays live in times where BIOS POST takes 500ms, the kernel one > > second and userspace another one [1], with times like that you really > > don't need any bootsplash or anything. With Windows 8 the laptop BIOSes > > finally got fixed to be silent and quick during POST. Now its our turn > > to achieve the same for the boot loader and the OS, both of which we > > control. > > Clearly you haven't used any modern EFI server systems where I've used > systems which take 15 minutes to post (and I can kickstart an entire > RHEL-6 install less than 7 mins) and are generally longer than their > predecessors Clearly, you haven't used any modern EFI laptop system where POST is 500ms. So, we both now pointed out that each other is terribly naive, what did us bring that? Are you really arguing that because your EFI system is slow we should make it even slower by adding pointless 15s delays into the boot everywhere? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Le Lun 11 mars 2013 20:57, Bill Nottingham a écrit : > Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) said: >> Matthias Clasen wrote: >> > - Turn off the graphical grub screen >> > >> > Even if we are not able to suppress the boot menu entirely, or having >> a clean boot menu like this: >> https://raw.github.com/gnome-design-team/gnome-mockups/master/system-lock-login-boot/bootmenu.png, >> avoiding the graphical screen will be a win in terms of reduced visual >> noise. >> >> What would there be instead? A text-mode boot menu? Or nothing at all >> displayed unless the user happens to know to press some key at the >> right moment? > > Ideally, we'd detect whether the previous boot failed in some way and only > offer the menu then, or if the user chooses to reboot into the menu. > (There's still some systemd/grub interaction work required for both of > these.) The problem is that if you specify the sequence by assuming perfect error detection, and ship with less-than-perfect automagic, you end up with lots of users complaining the system is trying to out-guess them and failing miserably. If you have a boot failure you're already in the problem zone and it is the worst possible time to throw new problems at your users. -- Nicolas Mailhot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Chris Murphy wrote: > A multiboot system needs at least a message to inform the user how to get to > the boot manager (the GRUB menu). A Fedora only system probably should > entirely suppress the menu or notice how to get to it. What if I need to revert to the previous kernel, or add some kernel parameter to get the system up enough to solve some boot problem? Detecting that the previous boot failed is nice and all, but that mechanism needs to be totally infallible if it's going to be the only way the Grub menu can be accessed. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Le Lun 11 mars 2013 21:16, Lennart Poettering a écrit : > On Mon, 11.03.13 13:08, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote: > >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Björn Persson >> wrote: >> > Or nothing at all displayed unless the user happens to know to press >> some key at the >> > right moment? >> >> A multiboot system needs at least a message to inform the user how to >> get to the boot manager (the GRUB menu). A Fedora only system probably >> should entirely suppress the menu or notice how to get to it. > > Somebody who is capable of installing multiple operating systems on one > machine should easily be savvy enough to remember that pressing > shift/esc/space/f2/whatever gets him the boot menu. > > If you installed multiple OSes and noticed that the boot menu is gone, > wouldn't pressing these keys be your natural reaction anyway? My natural reaction would be to curse whoever is making me waste minutes in press-random-keys-to-see-if-you-can-unlock-boot games to "win" a few seconds. I'm pretty sure any poll would find the same result. -- Nicolas Mailhot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Björn Persson wrote: > Lennart Poettering wrote: >> > If some text like "Press Esc now to choose which operating system to >> > boot." would be displayed, then the pause would need to be long enough >> > for the user to read and understand the instruction and then reach for >> > the right key – and the terser the text is made the harder it will be to >> > understand. I estimate that at least 15 seconds would be needed. Adding >> > "Press Enter to save a few seconds." would make it even more text to >> > read and understand. >> >> Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and >> kernel+userspace in 2s. And you want us to spend 15s for nothing in the >> boot loader, for a feature only the fewest people need, and those who >> need anyway know how to get? > > No, those 15 seconds were my argument for why it should NOT be done > that way. As I already wrote, if the Grub menu is simply displayed, > then five seconds is enough. Much better. And if you want to save those > five seconds you just need to press Enter. I'd argue "saving this 5 seconds" is more common than wanting to mess with the grub menu (maybe unless you dual boot). So if the only OS is fedora, we should just boot. If you really want to menu hold down any key. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Lennart Poettering wrote: > > If some text like "Press Esc now to choose which operating system to > > boot." would be displayed, then the pause would need to be long enough > > for the user to read and understand the instruction and then reach for > > the right key – and the terser the text is made the harder it will be to > > understand. I estimate that at least 15 seconds would be needed. Adding > > "Press Enter to save a few seconds." would make it even more text to > > read and understand. > > Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and > kernel+userspace in 2s. And you want us to spend 15s for nothing in the > boot loader, for a feature only the fewest people need, and those who > need anyway know how to get? No, those 15 seconds were my argument for why it should NOT be done that way. As I already wrote, if the Grub menu is simply displayed, then five seconds is enough. Much better. And if you want to save those five seconds you just need to press Enter. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 11.03.13 19:21, Tomasz Torcz (to...@pipebreaker.pl) wrote: > >> > > Fine with me, but don't forget to have a hint to this key visible e. >> > > g., "Press F1 to..." in some corner. Current >> > > policy that user just should know the key is not that good IMHO. >> > > After all, this is the first screen a newcomer >> > > meets. And thisis not only about the initial grub boot but also the >> > > "main" boot process (and screen) that follows. >> > >> > >> > I really do like the idea of a line which says: >> > "Press to see what's going on right now" >> > It creates a learning opportunity for new users and a relatively benign >> > way to present this info. >> >> “Press ESC for details” is fine. The only problem is that we have to include >> half of graphical stack to render this text correctly. And in correct >> locale. > > I don't think we should generate any message. Nothing at all. My BIOS > doesn't print a single line, and neither does the kernel if "quiet" is > used (which is the default). I really don't see why Plymouth or the boot > loader should print any more -- unless a real problem happens, or the > user explicitly asked for more, or the boot takes very long. > > Entering the boot loader is something that is a debugging feature, a > tool for professionals. It shouldn't be too hard to expect from them to > remember something as simple as maybe "press shift or Space or Esc" to > get the boot menu or more verbose output. I mean, honestly, that's > probably what most people would try automatically anyway if they want > feedback from the machine. > > We nowadays live in times where BIOS POST takes 500ms, the kernel one > second and userspace another one [1], with times like that you really > don't need any bootsplash or anything. With Windows 8 the laptop BIOSes > finally got fixed to be silent and quick during POST. Now its our turn > to achieve the same for the boot loader and the OS, both of which we > control. Clearly you haven't used any modern EFI server systems where I've used systems which take 15 minutes to post (and I can kickstart an entire RHEL-6 install less than 7 mins) and are generally longer than their predecessors Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > On 03/11/2013 12:58 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote: >> - Turn off the graphical grub screen > > I don't know why - I think grub2 is just a PITA to work with compared to > grub - but the intention here was that it should be turned off by > default in final releases, and on in alpha/beta releases. I think we > forgot to turn it off on F18 for some reason. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737339 It is not just that simple unfortunately ...but this is a regression which we should fix at some point. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
Peter Robinson wrote: > It use to only be displayed if there was more than one OS configured > or if the CTRL was held down. Having to press a particular key means > you have to get it at the second or two where grub isn't displayed. > The Ctrl option is quite nice as you can do it before the BIOS > disappears. But how are users supposed to discover it? Björn Persson signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:07:32 +0100 Lennart Poettering wrote: > > I don't think we should generate any message. Nothing at all. My BIOS > doesn't print a single line, and neither does the kernel if "quiet" is > used (which is the default). I really don't see why Plymouth or the > boot loader should print any more -- unless a real problem happens, > or the user explicitly asked for more, or the boot takes very long. > > Entering the boot loader is something that is a debugging feature, a > tool for professionals. It shouldn't be too hard to expect from them > to remember something as simple as maybe "press shift or Space or > Esc" to get the boot menu or more verbose output. I mean, honestly, > that's probably what most people would try automatically anyway if > they want feedback from the machine. I'm mostly concerned with making new professionals. We have to make the secret information discoverable if we want people to poke and prod around. If the bioses and systems years ago had been opaque we wouldn't have gotten this far. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 20:41, Björn Persson (bjorn@rombobjörn.se) wrote: > Ryan Lerch wrote: > > With regards to a label on the screen instructing the user how to show > > the hidden preboot menu (GRUB), It is clutter that is not needed. It > > makes boot up longer, as that screen will need to appear on the screen > > long enough for the user to read, at which point why not just display > > the preboot menu? > > Yes, why not display the Grub menu? > > Whether any text is displayed or not, there still needs to be a long > enough pause that the user has time to press a key. Not displaying any > text at all would make it harder to understand that the time to press > that key is now. Many people won't even understand that they have an > opportunity to press a key. > > If the menu is displayed, it takes only a few seconds to understand > that there is a choice and a countdown, and hopefully most people will > quickly discover that pressing a key stops the countdown. Thus five > seconds is a long enough pause. > > If some text like "Press Esc now to choose which operating system to > boot." would be displayed, then the pause would need to be long enough > for the user to read and understand the instruction and then reach for > the right key – and the terser the text is made the harder it will be to > understand. I estimate that at least 15 seconds would be needed. Adding > "Press Enter to save a few seconds." would make it even more text to > read and understand. Yikes. On a modern system the BIOS POST finishes within 500ms, and kernel+userspace in 2s. And you want us to spend 15s for nothing in the boot loader, for a feature only the fewest people need, and those who need anyway know how to get? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
> We nowadays live in times where BIOS POST takes 500ms, HA! I wish mine was that fast. With all the different BIOS chips doing thier own thing for all the add-on cards and peripherals I have, it takes about 45 seconds just to get to GRUB at all. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Mon, 11.03.13 13:08, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote: > On Mar 11, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Björn Persson > wrote: > > Or nothing at all displayed unless the user happens to know to press some > > key at the > > right moment? > > A multiboot system needs at least a message to inform the user how to > get to the boot manager (the GRUB menu). A Fedora only system probably > should entirely suppress the menu or notice how to get to it. Somebody who is capable of installing multiple operating systems on one machine should easily be savvy enough to remember that pressing shift/esc/space/f2/whatever gets him the boot menu. If you installed multiple OSes and noticed that the boot menu is gone, wouldn't pressing these keys be your natural reaction anyway? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
