Re: [Mageia-dev] Suggestion: what to do with iso?
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:59:20 +0200 Wolfgang Bornath wrote: > 2011/4/28 David Sjölin : > > Hello! > > > > I remember that when I created a usb from ISO I had some strange > > problem making the USB bootable. Maybe some comment on how to do > > that? I don't remember how I did it then, but I assume using fdisk > > or something? Dismount the USB, fidks /dev/sdb1 (or whatever it > > could be on the users computer) and change the bootable flag (?). > > And a comment on how to find the device for the USB. > > No, it's only a few steps with 'dd', and for those who love GUIs, I > just did a test: > mandriva-seed.sh also works on Mageia and with Mageia ISOs. Tested > with Beta2 / KDE and LXDE. > > So we should integrate a hint to mandriva-seed into the help. > The instructions at http://gnome3.org/tryit.html are pretty clear and could be used for a template.
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On 10/7/2010 11:00 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
Le jeudi 07 octobre 2010 à 10:22 -0400, Greg Harris a écrit :
You hit the point precisely. Mandriva's backports was a terrific idea
that does not succeed because (1) it is disabled by default and the
means to enable it as an update medium are made obscure by intention and
design and (2) the strange attitude taken, by some maintainers at least,
that anyone using backports is on their own ("Backports are not
supported!").
Well, when the backport was made without asking to developers first ( as
it happened with gwibber back at mandriva ), yes, the only thing I can
say is "I do not support it, because I didn't do it, nor was able to
test it correctly'.
If we tell "we do not have the ressources to fully test a backport, so
let's not do it", people are unhappy.
If we say "ok, here it is, but we didn't test, you are on your own",
people are unhappy.
As said by sinnerBOFH, if people want better backports, this requires
more ressources, there is no magic.
I certainly agree, and mean no disrespect to you and other maintainers
who generously contribute their time and energy. But the Mandriva
implementation of backports is not a solution for those who want a
continuously updated distro. It works for me and I appreciate that it's
there. But if you are going to design a new and appealing alternative,
the effort required to make backports really known and useful needs to
be taken into account.
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On 10/7/2010 7:23 AM, Olivier Méjean wrote:
Le jeudi 7 octobre 2010 13:00:21, Marc Paré a écrit :
I would challenge people to find a regular user who knew what the
"Backport" option was for, you may find some but clearly, they would be
in the minority. Otherwise, it would have been used quite extensively by
users. This is exactly what a user is usually interested in updating
his/her installation.
Backport was a media added for Mandriva 2007 in order to provide latest
versions of software. However, backport rpms were (and are) not officially
supported by Mandriva on the contrary of rpms in main (either /main/release or
/main/updates)
That make sense for a company based distribution to operate such a
discrimination, i am not sure that we have to follow such a way in a
community-driven distribution.
Olivier
You hit the point precisely. Mandriva's backports was a terrific idea
that does not succeed because (1) it is disabled by default and the
means to enable it as an update medium are made obscure by intention and
design and (2) the strange attitude taken, by some maintainers at least,
that anyone using backports is on their own ("Backports are not
supported!").
