On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 09:36 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
>> > No, I don't see any reason why VMs are any different from any other
>> > hardware plattform. So for VMs everything that applies to hardware
>> > applies. If you are using out of tr
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 09:36 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > No, I don't see any reason why VMs are any different from any other
> > hardware plattform. So for VMs everything that applies to hardware
> > applies. If you are using out of tree or closed source drivers you
> > are
> > on your own etc. pp
> No, I don't see any reason why VMs are any different from any other
> hardware plattform. So for VMs everything that applies to hardware
> applies. If you are using out of tree or closed source drivers you
> are
> on your own etc. pp.
It is a tempting thought, to address virtualization issues si
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> I can make strong cases for many things we cannot scale to. I'd love to
>> see those pushing for this to actually step up and do it. Get testcases
>> written, form groups of triagers, just run the damn tests regardless of
>> criteria st
On 2012-11-11 5:00, Josh Boyer wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that. The problem space here is "what is Fedora's
perception, fitting in within the confines of our rules, community,
and
abilities."
As far as I'm aware, there is nothing in our rules or our communities
that makes hard requirements a
On 11/11/2012 01:00 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On 2012-11-10 9:36, Josh Boyer wrote:
Now, if you want to debate the usefulness of those options, fine. Xen
sucks. I wasn't thrilled with _it_ being made a criteria either, but
hey it's there no
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On 2012-11-10 9:36, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>>
>> 1) It's making something Fedora does not build, provide, or have any
>> influence on part of our release process. Doubly so if you're going
>> down the "test it using Windows or OS X as a hos
On 11/11/2012 08:33 AM, drago01 wrote:
No, I don't see any reason why VMs are any different from any other
hardware plattform. So for VMs everything that applies to hardware
applies. If you are using out of tree or closed source drivers you are
on your own etc. pp.
I dont think none of the solu
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:15 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 04:31 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>>
>> We do, and that's a plausible outcome. But I think those pushing for a
>> stronger approach than this are making a decent case. It's at least worth
>> considering if our 'we do
On 11/11/2012 04:31 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
We do, and that's a plausible outcome. But I think those pushing for a
stronger approach than this are making a decent case. It's at least
worth considering if our 'we don't care about VBox' stance may be
hurting more than we had thought, and con
This is starting to get off topic but:
All of the critical accelerated drivers for Linux guests hosted by newer
versions of VMware are in the main Linux and X.org distributions. The
past few Fedora releases have included them.
While Fedora may not officially support it, I have every Fedora vers
On 2012-11-10 9:36, Josh Boyer wrote:
1) It's making something Fedora does not build, provide, or have any
influence on part of our release process. Doubly so if you're going
down the "test it using Windows or OS X as a host" route. I'm
personally not thrilled at all about adding such dependen
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 16:14 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:49 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
>> wrote:
>> > On 11/09/2012 08:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Maybe you're talking about running Fedora as a vbox or vmwa
On 11/09/2012 08:17 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Well those numbers show clear dominance in vbox and vmware on the
virtualzation field amongs those users that reported their smolt data so
I dont think we can ignore those numbers just like that.
Really? If you're installing a virtual machi
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:29 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 5:14 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> wrote:
>> On 11/10/2012 12:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>>
>>> I think there's still some host/guest confusion going on, possibly.
>>
>>
>> I was refereeing to Fedora as an guest in vmwa
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 5:14 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 12:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> I think there's still some host/guest confusion going on, possibly.
>
>
> I was refereeing to Fedora as an guest in vmware,vbox,hyperv not as an host
> which is in context with th
On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 04:14 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 12:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I think there's still some host/guest confusion going on, possibly.
>
> I was refereeing to Fedora as an guest in vmware,vbox,hyperv not as an
> host which is in context with the
On 11/10/2012 12:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
I think there's still some host/guest confusion going on, possibly.
I was refereeing to Fedora as an guest in vmware,vbox,hyperv not as an
host which is in context with the criteria discussion about Fedora being
installed along with other OS.
I
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 04:39:53PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> VBox does need out-of-tree kernel modules when run as a host on Linux.
> Some Linux distros package these via kmods or dkms or whatever. I'm not
> sure if RPMFusion packages them for Fedora. If your distro does not have
> a packaged
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 17:21 -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:24:54PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 11/09/2012 10:56 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> > >Vbox and vmware require external kernel modules.
> >
> > Can you please provide a link to where it says y
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:24:54PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 10:56 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> >Vbox and vmware require external kernel modules.
>
> Can you please provide a link to where it says you need to install
> "external kernel modules"
Somebody said so earli
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:17:16PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 10:56 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> >Vbox and vmware require external kernel modules. This detail alone
> >immediately limits an audience for these "solutions" to a rather narrow
> >circle
>
> How so?
Is th
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 16:14 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:49 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> wrote:
> > On 11/09/2012 08:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe you're talking about running Fedora as a vbox or vmware guest on
> >> some other OS?
> >
> >
> > Yup those are the u
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 13:06 -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 12:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 11/09/2012 07:24 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 11/09/2012 07:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Smolt is
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 10:01 +0100, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 09:49 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> >
> > But as has been pointed out why aren't we testing and ensuring that
> > Fedora runs well in vmware,hyperv and virtualbox since we ensure it
> > works well being dualbooted al
On 11/09/2012 10:56 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
Vbox and vmware require external kernel modules.
Can you please provide a link to where it says you need to install
"external kernel modules" because there is no mention of a such things
here [1]
JBG
1.http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/micros
On 11/09/2012 10:56 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
Vbox and vmware require external kernel modules. This detail alone
immediately limits an audience for these "solutions" to a rather narrow
circle
How so?
JBG
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedora
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:58:07PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 06:40 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:16:24PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>On 11/09/2012 05:30 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:49:19AM +,
On 11/09/2012 01:49 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/09/2012 08:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
Maybe you're talking about running Fedora as a vbox or vmware guest on
some other OS?
Yup those are the use cases I'm concern about as in users running
other OS and installing Fedora as an virtual
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:49 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 08:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>> Maybe you're talking about running Fedora as a vbox or vmware guest on
>> some other OS?
>
>
> Yup those are the use cases I'm concern about as in users running other OS
> and installin
On 11/09/2012 08:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
Maybe you're talking about running Fedora as a vbox or vmware guest on
some other OS?
Yup those are the use cases I'm concern about as in users running other
OS and installing Fedora as an virtualzation guest in that OS. ( like
Robyn pointed out with
On 11/09/2012 08:06 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
Sticking strictly to the statistics point - I tend to agree at least
on Vbox - esp. for all the people who do dev-type work on macs, etc.
VMware is a bit harder to see - obviously they're the huge elephant in
the virt space but I would tend to th
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 07:56 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>> My personal take is that Windows doesn't try and load things into the
>> Linux kernel, or otherwise disrupt the installed Fedora OS so I don't
>> personally care.
>
>
> And vbox vmware
On 11/09/2012 07:56 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
My personal take is that Windows doesn't try and load things into the
Linux kernel, or otherwise disrupt the installed Fedora OS so I don't
personally care.
And vbox vmware and hyperv do?
What about ( citrix ) xen in that regard as well?
Actually netw
On 11/09/2012 12:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/09/2012 07:24 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
On 11/09/2012 07:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Smolt is also being retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Smolt_retirement
The stats a
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 07:24 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/09/2012 07:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Smolt is also being retired:
https://fedoraproj
On 11/09/2012 07:24 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
On 11/09/2012 07:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Smolt is also being retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Smolt_retirement
The stats also have not been updated in quite a while.
I'd take an
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 07:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> Smolt is also being retired:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Smolt_retirement
>>
>> The stats also have not been updated in quite a while.
>>
>> I'd take any data from smolt with
On 11/09/2012 07:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Smolt is also being retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Smolt_retirement
The stats also have not been updated in quite a while.
I'd take any data from smolt with a block of salt.
Well those numbers show clear dominance in vbox and vmware on the
Smolt is also being retired:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Smolt_retirement
The stats also have not been updated in quite a while.
I'd take any data from smolt with a block of salt.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubs
On 11/09/2012 06:40 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:16:24PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/09/2012 05:30 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:49:19AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
I was saying today it's more common that people us
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:16:24PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 05:30 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:49:19AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>I was saying today it's more common that people use vm ( In both
> >>>direction linux in
On 11/09/2012 05:30 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:49:19AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
>I was saying today it's more common that people use vm ( In both
>direction linux in vm on windows and windows in vm on linux )
>instead of dualbooting.
Just out of curio
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:49:19AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> I was saying today it's more common that people use vm ( In both
> direction linux in vm on windows and windows in vm on linux )
> instead of dualbooting.
Just out of curiosity. Do you have some real data to back up thi
On 11/09/2012 03:52 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 03:31:23PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Btw last time I check the cloud solution being deployed rank this...
Where were you checking?
Inhouse Gartner document which seems to be inline with the recent cloud
survey
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 03:31:23PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Btw last time I check the cloud solution being deployed rank this...
Where were you checking?
> 1.VMware
> 2 Xen
> 3.KVM
> 4.HyperV
These are virtualization technologies, which are fundamental to cloud but
not in themselv
On 11/09/2012 03:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 03:04:48PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
afaik we dont have any criteria that specifically deals with cloud bits
Final criterion #13.
Interesting which cloud access does QA have to actually test this stuff?
Btw la
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 03:04:48PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> afaik we dont have any criteria that specifically deals with cloud bits
Final criterion #13.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https:/
On 11/09/2012 01:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 09:31:47AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
But: Which environments do we take into account? Carry this to
extremes: We also need to look at cloud infrastructure envs, which
are a special case of virtualization
The c
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 09:31:47AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >But: Which environments do we take into account? Carry this to
> >extremes: We also need to look at cloud infrastructure envs, which
> >are a special case of virtualization
> The cloud community seems to be taking care
On 11/09/2012 09:01 AM, Matthias Runge wrote:
On 11/09/2012 09:49 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
But as has been pointed out why aren't we testing and ensuring that
Fedora runs well in vmware,hyperv and virtualbox since we ensure it
works well being dualbooted alongside windows?
JBG
OK, a
On 11/09/2012 09:49 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
But as has been pointed out why aren't we testing and ensuring that
Fedora runs well in vmware,hyperv and virtualbox since we ensure it
works well being dualbooted alongside windows?
JBG
OK, agreed. It seems common, to run Fedora also in a
On 11/09/2012 07:49 AM, Matthias Runge wrote:
On 11/09/2012 01:01 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
In today's age it's become more common to just run GNU/Linux in a vm
since more or less all hw you buy this day has a virtual capable cpu
instead of jumping through the partitioning hoops and lo
On 11/09/2012 01:01 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
In today's age it's become more common to just run GNU/Linux in a vm
since more or less all hw you buy this day has a virtual capable cpu
instead of jumping through the partitioning hoops and loose the warranty
and support while you are at i
On 11/08/2012 10:34 PM, John Morris wrote:
Few laptops can fit a second hard drive. And you quickly learn that in
the real word you had better leave Windows installed so can get tech
support, download new firmware, etc. So you resize it down to minimal
and put your work OS on. And if you can't
On 2012-11-08 16:28 (GMT-0600) John Morris composed:
We have suffered since day one with Microsoft's refusal to admit other
products exist and merrily destroy other boot loaders without so much as
an "I see something else in the MBR, should I overwrite it?" prompt.
pot <-black-> kettle
Instal
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 11:55 +0100, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I actually don't understand the RHEL angle on this missing piece
> either. What is the use case of installing RHEL along side Windows?
> Really, enterprise users do this? They share a single disk with one
> bootloader/manager taking over ano
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 07:51 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> We can still test this and installing Fedora, and arguably we should be
> doing that along other OS other than just Microsoft as well.
>
> We would just not have the Fedora release dependent upon the result from
> those tests..
> I actually agree that your argument for supporting install as a VBox
> *guest* makes a lot of sense, really, it's a pretty common use case.
> It's probably true that we've applied the 'we don't support VBox'
> mantra
> too easily to the VBox guest case, where it doesn't entirely apply.
> It's
> m
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 12:07 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Though we'd need to consider the problem where it breaks
> because of something in upstream VBox, which we can't control; that
> might be a deal-breaker for making it a blocker.
Before anyone says 'but that applies to Windows too!', VBox
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 05:33 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > I don't think there's a conflict at all. All distros work hard to
> > dual
> > boot with Windows successfully because that's how you get people to
> > try
> > Linux: i.e., it's actually a key thing to have *in order to driver
> > our
> > phi
On 2012-11-07 09:13 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed:
it's very easy to be clean and smart if you offer no options for
partitioning, install source, or package set :)
My only exposure to W8 was last May when I installed the beta to a system
with 8 filesystems it supports, and last partitio
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 11:08 +0100, Alexander Volovics wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 11:59:31PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > > We would just not have the Fedora release dependent upon the result from
> > > those tests...
>
> > In practice what usually happens is I fire up the VM I kee
On 11/07/2012 01:54 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
Hey, Matěj, do we really need to discuss such obvious issues? Just ask around,
in Red Hat, some students, look at some support forums, and you'll have no
doubt. Loads of people dual-boot every day.
The statistics could be interesting wrt to other mino
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 12:00:09 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Fact is, a _lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because
> > they're
> > not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they still need to
> > run
> > some apps on Windows, or they want to play games, or whatever. Is
> > anyon
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 11:59:49 + (UTC)
Matěj Cepl wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 12:00:09 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Fact is, a _lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because
> > they're not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they still
> > need to run some apps on Windows, o
On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 12:00:09 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Fact is, a _lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because they're
> not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they still need to run
> some apps on Windows, or they want to play games, or whatever. Is anyone
> seriously doubti
On Nov 7, 2012, at 11:33 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> Yet, we don't give a damn about VirtualBox support. It's not in our criteria.
> We don't care much about its issues. We care a bit, but not much. Even though
> it's even open-source.
I think it's a big missing piece of the puzzle for overall
> I don't think there's a conflict at all. All distros work hard to
> dual
> boot with Windows successfully because that's how you get people to
> try
> Linux: i.e., it's actually a key thing to have *in order to driver
> our
> philosophy*.
>
> > The current approach is that we don't care about p
;
>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 3:09:39 AM
> Subject: Re: How to interpret F18 Blocker criterion
>
> On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 00:42 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 11/07/2012 12:04 AM, drago01 wrote:
> > > That's not absurd ...
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 11:59:31PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > We would just not have the Fedora release dependent upon the result from
> > those tests...
> In practice what usually happens is I fire up the VM I keep around
> specifically for this purpose and do the test on the last few
On 11/07/2012 07:59 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>We can still test this and installing Fedora, and arguably we should be
>doing that along other OS other than just Microsoft as well.
There's a ticket for writing some other dual boot test cases, I think.
No-one's ever got around to picking it up
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 07:51 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/07/2012 02:09 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 00:42 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >> >On 11/07/2012 12:04 AM, drago01 wrote:
> >>> > >That's not absurd ... that's reality.
> >> >
> >> >I'm perfe
On 11/07/2012 02:09 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 00:42 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>On 11/07/2012 12:04 AM, drago01 wrote:
> >That's not absurd ... that's reality.
>
>I'm perfectly well aware how absurd and real that criteria is
Does anyone else agree with Johann
On 11/07/2012 02:09 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 00:42 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/07/2012 12:04 AM, drago01 wrote:
That's not absurd ... that's reality.
I'm perfectly well aware how absurd and real that criteria is
Does anyone else agree with Johann that
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 00:42 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/07/2012 12:04 AM, drago01 wrote:
> > That's not absurd ... that's reality.
>
> I'm perfectly well aware how absurd and real that criteria is
Does anyone else agree with Johann that we should change or remove the
criterion?
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 00:23 +0100, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:43 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> wrote:
>
> >
> > You do realize by having this criteria you are tying the release to
> users having existing windows installs be it oem installs or not and
> that's just absurd…
>
>
On 11/07/2012 12:04 AM, drago01 wrote:
That's not absurd ... that's reality.
I'm perfectly well aware how absurd and real that criteria is
JBG
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Sorry for top posting ... gmail's new compose thing is just stupid.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
That's not absurd ... that's reality.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:36 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 11:23 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:43 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
>> wrote:
>>
>> You do realize by having this criteria you are tying the release to
>
On 11/06/2012 11:23 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:43 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
You do realize by having this criteria you are tying the release to users
having existing windows installs be it oem installs or not and that's just
absurd…
Why is OEM vs retail install r
On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:43 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> You do realize by having this criteria you are tying the release to users
> having existing windows installs be it oem installs or not and that's just
> absurd…
Why is OEM vs retail install relevant? It's NTFS in any case. You h
On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:55 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> People that want to try Fedora can do so via live cd/dvd/usb or in a vm and
> those that dont need to reformat/repartition and reinstall windows and then
> install Fedora assuming that they have legal copy of Microsoft Windows in th
On 11/06/2012 10:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
What? you don't have to reinstall Windows to install Fedora alongside
it. Almost all OEM preloads of Windows are simple installs, just what we
list in the criteria and what we test: they just have a single big
partition with Windows on it (and maybe
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 21:55 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> People that want to try Fedora can do so via live cd/dvd/usb or in a vm
> and those that dont need to reformat/repartition and reinstall windows
> and then install Fedora assuming that they have legal copy of Microsoft
> Window
On 11/06/2012 09:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Ultimately the intent of the criterion is that a simple 'do a default
install of Windows, then do a default install of Fedora next to it' case
is fairly commonly seen in the real world, reasonably stable in
behaviour (Windows has not changed in how i
On Nov 6, 2012, at 9:34 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 08:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Fact is, a_lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because they're
>> not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they still need to run
>> some apps on Windows, or they want t
On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:19 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> Well the fundamental question to ask ourselves is if windows or os-x do honor
> other operating system installed then we should if not we should not
> regardless of any numbers game you like to play trying to justify this
> crite
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 21:19 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 09:02 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 20:34 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >> >On 11/06/2012 08:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>> > >Fact is, a_lot_ of people still dual boot with Wind
On 11/06/2012 09:02 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 20:34 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>On 11/06/2012 08:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >Fact is, a_lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because they're
> >not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they sti
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 20:34 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 08:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Fact is, a_lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because they're
> > not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they still need to run
> > some apps on Windows, or they
On 11/06/2012 08:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Fact is, a_lot_ of people still dual boot with Windows, because they're
not sure they want to switch 100% to Linux, or they still need to run
some apps on Windows, or they want to play games, or whatever. Is anyone
seriously doubting it's a common a
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 17:57 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 05:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> >Good question. I guess the answer is "practicality", dual boot with
> >> >Windows is the most common use case. We can't really extend this
> >> >criterion to_any_ operating syst
On 11/06/2012 05:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>Good question. I guess the answer is "practicality", dual boot with
>Windows is the most common use case. We can't really extend this
>criterion to_any_ operating system, we don't really want to block
>Fedora because it can't properly dual-boot wit
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 11:06 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > On 11/06/2012 02:30 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > >> The F18 Blocker criteria contain:
> > >>
> > >> The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> > >> existing clean single-partition Windows installation and either
> > >
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 14:33 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 09:30:41 -0500 (EST)
> Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> > > The F18 Blocker criteria contain:
> > >
> > > The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> > > existing clean single-partition Windows installatio
> On 11/06/2012 02:30 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> >> The F18 Blocker criteria contain:
> >>
> >> The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> >> existing clean single-partition Windows installation and either
> >> install
> >> a bootloader which can boot into the Windows instal
On 11/06/2012 02:30 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
The F18 Blocker criteria contain:
The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
existing clean single-partition Windows installation and either
install
a bootloader which can boot into the Windows installation, or leave
the
Windows
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 09:30:41 -0500 (EST)
> Kamil Paral wrote:
>
>> > The F18 Blocker criteria contain:
>> >
>> > The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
>> > existing clean single-partition Windows installation and ei
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 09:30:41 -0500 (EST)
Kamil Paral wrote:
> > The F18 Blocker criteria contain:
> >
> > The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
> > existing clean single-partition Windows installation and either
> > install
> > a bootloader which can boot into the Win
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
