Fw: [SLE] SuSE 9.2 not quite fully cooked?
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Rankin"
Unfortunately,
This is the normal side effect, growing pains, whatever you want to call it..., of applying the corporate model to an open source project. I have lived the very painful experience of the Mandrake transition which is what led to my latest server running Suse. Hopefully, Suse will take note of the Mandrake experience and of all the former Mandrake users on this list to avoid the same alienation of its base.
The sole culprit is usually the race to release version (number next) for $ reasons. That inevitably leads to versions released before they are ready, containing small, but crippling bugs that causes newbies to just give up. To Mandrake's credit, things are getting better. But the days of mdk 8.1, 8.2, 9.0, 9.1, 9.2 and 10 were dark days indeed with candid comments from long time user of "better wait for the next release before considering applying the latest release to a production machine." Suse would do well to avoid this reputation.
As far as Suse is concerned, the 9.2 release in the midst of the Novell transition -- the jury is still out. The 2.6.8 kernel itself posed challenges for this release that, granted, a little additional time would have helped smooth out. But, all in all, I think the true litmus test will be how we do with Suse's release number next. When Novell bought word perfect, the 6.0 release was terrible and everyone howled. But the 6.1 release was a thing of beauty. So I remain cautiously optimistic.
-- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. RANKIN * BERTIN, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 (936) 715-9333 (936) 715-9339 fax www.rankin-bertin.com -- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Deppe"
To: "SuSE Linux E..." Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:28 AM Subject: Re: [SLE] SuSE 9.2 not quite fully cooked? Hi Peter and all,
I have been experiencing similar things and even didn't get any response so far when trying to get support from novell. I couldn't even start 2 of 3 systems with neither the CD or DVD. Well I didn't have the time to get into that yet. Maybe later.
Regards Martin
Peter Nixon wrote:
Hi Guys
Is it just me, or is SuSE 9.2 not quite fully cooked?
So far, SuSE 9.2 Pro has failed to upgrade (Yast2 cannot mount the root partition) 2 of the 4 systems I have attempted to upgrade (from 9.1 pro).
FreeRADIUS has a broken init script which causes it not do ANYTHING unless you delete 3 lines. Postgresql doesn't come on the CD set, only on the DVD. This is a major PITA for me as I install Postgres on 80% of the servers I setup, and so far I have NEVER seen a server with a DVD drive. Cyrus IMAP is broken. (An update fixes this though)
Many -devel packages are missing from the CD set that have the non -devel packages. This means that again the DVD is required.
So far I only have SuSE 9.2 on 6 machines, so I at this rate I am sure I will bump into other issues. (I have installed around 30 SuSE 9.1 systems in the last 6 months...)
Novell/SuSE, please take more care with 9.3 as this is NOT the level of quality I have come to expect from SuSE. I have been using SuSE Linux since version 6.0 and until now, every version has been better, more stable and with less bugs. Please don't reverse this!!!
On a positive note, some of the extra packages in 9.2 make life easier when roaming between networks with my notebook (the SCPM profile switched on the toolbar in particular). Having 64bit binaries on the DVD along with 32bit is also a nice touch. Our first test of SuSE 9.2 on Athlon64 went painlessly.
Asterisk, ifplugd, and a bunch of other nice/usefull/interesting packages are also nice inclusions that make SuSE 9.2 worth the purchase and won't be sending me to any competitors anytime soon, but the initial problems I have met so far were not a good first impression.
Regards
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Rankin"
To: "Martin Deppe" Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 12:27 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] SuSE 9.2 not quite fully cooked? Unfortunately,
This is the normal side effect, growing pains, whatever you want to call it..., of applying the corporate model to an open source project. I have lived the very painful experience of the Mandrake transition which is what led to my latest server running Suse. Hopefully, Suse will take note of the Mandrake experience and of all the former Mandrake users on this list to avoid the same alienation of its base.
The sole culprit is usually the race to release version (number next) for $ reasons. That inevitably leads to versions released before they are ready, containing small, but crippling bugs that causes newbies to just give up. To Mandrake's credit, things are getting better. But the days of mdk 8.1, 8.2, 9.0, 9.1, 9.2 and 10 were dark days indeed with candid comments from long time user of "better wait for the next release before considering applying the latest release to a production machine." Suse would do well to avoid this reputation.
As far as Suse is concerned, the 9.2 release in the midst of the Novell transition -- the jury is still out. The 2.6.8 kernel itself posed challenges for this release that, granted, a little additional time would have helped smooth out. But, all in all, I think the true litmus test will be how we do with Suse's release number next. When Novell bought word perfect, the 6.0 release was terrible and everyone howled. But the 6.1 release was a thing of beauty. So I remain cautiously optimistic.
Mandrake 9.2, 10.0 and now 10.1 are fine, I've not seen any problems
David Rankin wrote: there. SuSE 9.2 is I hope, a temporary aboration, it'd better be. The bean counters always demand on-budget and on time, the heck with the quality and full speed on the road to ruin. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer =====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====
As far as Suse is concerned, the 9.2 release in the midst of the Novell transition -- the jury is still out. The 2.6.8 kernel itself posed challenges for this release that, granted, a little additional time would have helped smooth out. But, all in all, I think the true litmus test will be how we do with Suse's release number next. When Novell bought word perfect, the 6.0 release was terrible and everyone howled. But the 6.1 release was a thing of beauty. So I remain cautiously optimistic. Mandrake 9.2, 10.0 and now 10.1 are fine, I've not seen any problems there. SuSE 9.2 is I hope, a temporary aboration, it'd better be. The bean counters always demand on-budget and on time, the heck with the quality and full speed on the road to ruin.
We've moved several of our central servers to SuSe 9.2. And beyond a few run-of-the-mill problems it has proven to be a good quality solution.
On Monday 20 December 2004 02:10 pm, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
We've moved several of our central servers to SuSe 9.2. And beyond a few run-of-the-mill problems it has proven to be a good quality solution.
I have to agree. SuSe 9.2 has been the best Linux distro I've used. Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems? Doug
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me. Steve
Just my opinion, but out of the box the 9.2 is much better than 9.1. ).1 was slow up unitl version 2.6.x-105 was released (for i386). Version 9.2 is much better for performance (i am a j2ee developer on linux, so i can se performance gains...) Also, all the acpi related stuff worked out of the box on my aging Latitude c840, apart of course, from the non acpi aware nvidia linux drivers. So, acutally, i can say that form 8.0 on, 9.2 is the bes out of the box. Alle 21:55, lunedì 20 dicembre 2004, Steve Kratz ha scritto:
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me.
Steve
-- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Migliaia di prodotti al prezzo che decidi tu. Fai subito la tua offerta! Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid50&d -12
Luca Botti wrote:
Just my opinion, but out of the box the 9.2 is much better than 9.1. ).1 was slow up unitl version 2.6.x-105 was released (for i386). Version 9.2 is much better for performance (i am a j2ee developer on linux, so i can se performance gains...)
Also, all the acpi related stuff worked out of the box on my aging Latitude c840, apart of course, from the non acpi aware nvidia linux drivers.
So, acutally, i can say that form 8.0 on, 9.2 is the bes out of the box.
[snip] My experience too, both on main PC and a laptop. 9.2 is the best for me for a while. In addition, SuSE now has a score of small touches here and there - like very good anti-aliaising for fonts, and more and more functionality in YaST. To this we can add the excellent packman site and apt-get for SuSE. Individually these may not be much but they soon add up to a much better experience for me, a desktop/workstation user first and a server user second. Using Debian recently, I really noticed how bare and plain-vanilla Debian Sarge's desktop is by comparision to 9.2. There are simply no user-friendly touches at all because, it would seem, no one is pulling a Debian desktop together in the way that SuSE is (they are doing Debian-based desktops, like Ubuntu, instead). Creating a first-class desktop/work station probably takes a huge amount of work. It needs so many subtle touches and can't be done in a day. :) Fish
On Monday 20 December 2004 22:55, Steve Kratz wrote:
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me.
Yes. I agree with you here. I have not had any stability problems with the SuSE 9.2 boxes I have built after I made them work. Everything I was complaining about is related to installation issues and broken init scripts. Once you get past these issues SuSE 9.2 is better than anything that came before it. I just hate to see these minor glitches ruin what could be an almost perfect user experience. (The broken freeradius init script is inexcusable! It means they modified it from the previously working one AND never bothered to test it!) Anyway I have a meeting with Novell today and will make my thoughts known :-) Cheers -- Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
Peter Nixon wrote:
On Monday 20 December 2004 22:55, Steve Kratz wrote:
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me.
Yes. I agree with you here. I have not had any stability problems with the SuSE 9.2 boxes I have built after I made them work. Everything I was complaining about is related to installation issues and broken init scripts. Once you get past these issues SuSE 9.2 is better than anything that came before it. I just hate to see these minor glitches ruin what could be an almost perfect user experience. (The broken freeradius init script is inexcusable! It means they modified it from the previously working one AND never bothered to test it!)
Anyway I have a meeting with Novell today and will make my thoughts known :-)
Cheers
It's the darn install problems, once installed, it's stable. If you catch this before your meeting, please see if you can get them to open their test releases or at least extend the number of people testing. I was supposed to be on the list, but was not included. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer =====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====
It's the darn install problems, once installed, it's stable. If you catch this before your meeting, please see if you can get them to open their test releases or at least extend the number of people testing. I was supposed to be on the list, but was not included. Regards Sid.
That's one thing the Fedora releases have over SuSE- the public test releases... Most of the folks I know running SuSE Linux have at least one spare test machine they could sacrifce to the gods of stability... Steve
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Peter Nixon wrote:
On Monday 20 December 2004 22:55, Steve Kratz wrote:
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me.
Yes. I agree with you here. I have not had any stability problems with the SuSE 9.2 boxes I have built after I made them work. Everything I was complaining about is related to installation issues and broken init scripts. Once you get past these issues SuSE 9.2 is better than anything that came before it. I just hate to see these minor glitches ruin what could be an almost perfect user experience. (The broken freeradius init script is inexcusable! It means they modified it from the previously working one AND never bothered to test it!)
Anyway I have a meeting with Novell today and will make my thoughts known :-)
See if you can tell them about lines 947 through 949 of /sbin/ifup,
which if USE_IPV6 is set to no, makes all of the interfaces on my
machine have no IP address at startup. I'm not kidding.
--
Carpe diem - Seize the day.
Carp in denim - There's a fish in my pants!
Jon Nelson
Peter wrote:
(The broken freeradius init script is inexcusable! It means they modified it from the previously working one AND never bothered to test it!)
These type of issues are the issues I was referring to with:
"That inevitably leads to versions released before they are
ready, containing small, but crippling bugs that causes newbies to just give
up."
Don't get me wrong, I remain a big fan of Suse. I can't through darts at
9.2 -- I haven't installed it -- yet. The original intent of my reply was
simply to raise awareness of problems I have seen following corporate
entrance into an open source project, and hoping upon hope that maybe
someone in Novell may take it to heart to avoid similar problems with Suse.
(please ignore the comma splice -- I couldn't resist)
--
David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E.
RANKIN * BERTIN, PLLC
510 Ochiltree Street
Nacogdoches, Texas 75961
(936) 715-9333
(936) 715-9339 fax
www.rankin-bertin.com
--
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Nixon"
On Monday 20 December 2004 22:55, Steve Kratz wrote:
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me.
Yes. I agree with you here. I have not had any stability problems with the SuSE 9.2 boxes I have built after I made them work. Everything I was complaining about is related to installation issues and broken init scripts. Once you get past these issues SuSE 9.2 is better than anything that came before it. I just hate to see these minor glitches ruin what could be an almost perfect user experience. (The broken freeradius init script is inexcusable! It means they modified it from the previously working one AND never bothered to test it!)
Anyway I have a meeting with Novell today and will make my thoughts known :-)
Cheers
--
Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 09:18 +0200, Peter Nixon wrote:
On Monday 20 December 2004 22:55, Steve Kratz wrote:
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
I'd generally agree with that-- other than then buggy acpi kernel 9.2 shipped with that caused some headaches with my laptop, and the "Only available on the damn DVD" issues, it's been pretty rock solid for me.
Yes. I agree with you here. I have not had any stability problems with the SuSE 9.2 boxes I have built after I made them work. Everything I was complaining about is related to installation issues and broken init scripts. Once you get past these issues SuSE 9.2 is better than anything that came before it. I just hate to see these minor glitches ruin what could be an almost perfect user experience. (The broken freeradius init script is inexcusable! It means they modified it from the previously working one AND never bothered to test it!)
Anyway I have a meeting with Novell today and will make my thoughts known :-)
Cheers
--
Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
Let us know how your ideas are received. Chris Linux user 375231.
Doug B wrote:
On Monday 20 December 2004 02:10 pm, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
We've moved several of our central servers to SuSe 9.2. And beyond a few run-of-the-mill problems it has proven to be a good quality solution.
I have to agree. SuSe 9.2 has been the best Linux distro I've used.
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
Doug
This has definitely not been my experience as chronicled on this list. What has been surprising to me is the almost total lack of response to the problems I've been detailing such as phantom drives being listed, drives not being found, and apparently total inability to deal with ATAPI zip drives. At this point I'm looking into other distributions. Up through 9.0 I felt like SuSE was THE distribution to own, but I'm beginning to change my opinions more and more with each subsequent release since 9.0 dave -- David C. Johanson Linux Counter # 116410 Powered by SuSE Linux 7.3 People who behold a phenomenon will often extend their thinking beyond it; people who merely hear about the phenomenon will not be moved to think at all. -- Goethe
I too have been having issues. I was pretty disappointed in the 9.2 release so far. Nothing but headaches doing install's on my 64bit servers. A few just kernel panic at initial install and nothing done can seem to correct it. However 9.1 installs without a problem on the same machines. Brad Dameron Linux Systems Administrator SeaTab Software www.seatab.com On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 15:19, David Johanson wrote:
Doug B wrote:
On Monday 20 December 2004 02:10 pm, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
We've moved several of our central servers to SuSe 9.2. And beyond a few run-of-the-mill problems it has proven to be a good quality solution.
I have to agree. SuSe 9.2 has been the best Linux distro I've used.
Looking back at the list archives for the past two years, it looks to me like there is a pretty good jump in activity around each new release. I don't see that this time, at least not yet. Could that mean that fewer people are having problems?
Doug
This has definitely not been my experience as chronicled on this list. What has been surprising to me is the almost total lack of response to the problems I've been detailing such as phantom drives being listed, drives not being found, and apparently total inability to deal with ATAPI zip drives. At this point I'm looking into other distributions. Up through 9.0 I felt like SuSE was THE distribution to own, but I'm beginning to change my opinions more and more with each subsequent release since 9.0
dave -- David C. Johanson Linux Counter # 116410 Powered by SuSE Linux 7.3
People who behold a phenomenon will often extend their thinking beyond it; people who merely hear about the phenomenon will not be moved to think at all. -- Goethe
On Monday 20 December 2004 05:19 pm, David Johanson wrote:
This has definitely not been my experience as chronicled on this list. What has been surprising to me is the almost total lack of response to the problems I've been detailing such as phantom drives being listed, drives not being found, and apparently total inability to deal with ATAPI zip drives. At this point I'm looking into other distributions. Up through 9.0 I felt like SuSE was THE distribution to own, but I'm beginning to change my opinions more and more with each subsequent release since 9.0
I do have to agree on the zip drive thing. I still haven't looked into that. I rarely use the drive any more. Could it be there is a lack of response to your problems because so few are seeing them. For me, it's hard to solve a problem I haven't seen and can't reproduce. No OS is perfect. I've had my share of problems getting windows to install on some boxes. On this box (amd64, nforce, nvidia), I had to do a bios upgrade just to get 9.1 to install. Even then it was pretty unstable. 9.2 wasn't much better until I turned acpi off. Since then everything has been good... I hope it continues. I'm not married to Suse. It works for me. If it ever doesn't, I'll move on to what does. That's what I did when Red Hat went a direction I didn't like. To me that is part of the power of linux. Frankly, I kind of liked Gentoo, but Suse is giving me all I need at less of a learning curve so I'll stay a while. I'm sure you'll find what works best for you. Good luck Doug
A great boon to the SuSE release process would be for an upgrade to be able to upgrade from multiple prior releases just as on Windows. With SuSE, if you miss 9.2 because it hoses your system, don't expect to be able to cleanly upgrade to 9.3 from 9.1. You have to go through each intermediate release no matter how bad they are and no matter how badly they may not work on your computer in order to be able to do the update/upgrade feature in Yast[2]. That's a major detraction for those who don't want to upgrade 3-4 times per year. -linda
On Monday 20 December 2004 9:52 pm, Linda A. W. wrote:
A great boon to the SuSE release process would be for an upgrade to be able to upgrade from multiple prior releases just as on Windows. With SuSE, if you miss 9.2 because it hoses your system, don't expect to be able to cleanly upgrade to 9.3 from 9.1.
You really can't 'cleanly' upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2. Too many things change. I know, I'm still sorting thru the mess on my box. After you 'upgrade', try a locate .rpmnew after your locatedb is rebuilt, you'll see what I mean. Scott -- POPFile, the OpenSource EMail Classifier http://popfile.sourceforge.net/ Linux 2.6.8-24.5-default x86_64
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 12:52 am, Linda A. W. wrote:
A great boon to the SuSE release process would be for an upgrade to be able to upgrade from multiple prior releases just as on Windows. With SuSE, if you miss 9.2 because it hoses your system, don't expect to be able to cleanly upgrade to 9.3 from 9.1.
You have to go through each intermediate release no matter how bad they are and no matter how badly they may not work on your computer in order to be able to do the update/upgrade feature in Yast[2]. That's a major detraction for those who don't want to upgrade 3-4 times per year.
-linda ============
Linda, I'll have to disagree on a couple things in your mail. Upgrading any version of Windows to another version is haphazard at best! As unstable as it is in one form, it will become even more so by updating. You'll always get a better setup with a fresh install. I've updated two 9.0 systems and two 9.1 systems with SuSE 9.2 and am happy to say all went well. Those folks are happily working away on their 9.2 systems now. I do, as most here will confirm also, prefer to fresh install, if the versions are very far apart. 8.x to 9.2, try updating, but fresh install recommended. 7.x to 9.2? Absolutely a new install, because of the many changes that have occurred. Part of the problem I think most people see are the strength & weakness of Linux. It's great because the programs, etc. are constantly updated, improved. It can be frustrating, because the programs, etc are constantly updated, improved. ;o) regards, Lee -- --- KMail v1.7.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.2 --- Registered Linux User #225206 "Don't let the fear of striking out keep you from playing the game!"
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 09:30 -0500, BandiPat wrote:
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 12:52 am, Linda A. W. wrote:
A great boon to the SuSE release process would be for an upgrade to be able to upgrade from multiple prior releases just as on Windows. With SuSE, if you miss 9.2 because it hoses your system, don't expect to be able to cleanly upgrade to 9.3 from 9.1.
You have to go through each intermediate release no matter how bad they are and no matter how badly they may not work on your computer in order to be able to do the update/upgrade feature in Yast[2]. That's a major detraction for those who don't want to upgrade 3-4 times per year.
-linda ============
Linda, I'll have to disagree on a couple things in your mail. Upgrading any version of Windows to another version is haphazard at best! As unstable as it is in one form, it will become even more so by updating. You'll always get a better setup with a fresh install.
I've updated two 9.0 systems and two 9.1 systems with SuSE 9.2 and am happy to say all went well. Those folks are happily working away on their 9.2 systems now. I do, as most here will confirm also, prefer to fresh install, if the versions are very far apart. 8.x to 9.2, try updating, but fresh install recommended. 7.x to 9.2? Absolutely a new install, because of the many changes that have occurred. Part of the problem I think most people see are the strength & weakness of Linux. It's great because the programs, etc. are constantly updated, improved. It can be frustrating, because the programs, etc are constantly updated, improved. ;o)
regards, Lee
-- --- KMail v1.7.2 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.2 --- Registered Linux User #225206 "Don't let the fear of striking out keep you from playing the game!"
I have to agree with Lee; I have always done a fresh install with my win release ugrades. They never work properly if done as upgrade install. If you regularly back up your data you should not have a problem with a fresh install.Rather it should be quicker ( as no extra hassles after install) and cleaner as it wipes out any traces of problems that may be gestating within your system.( rather like in Alien). At least with Suse you can by an upgrade version without having to have the full previous version and still do a completly cleean install. Chris linux user 375231.
Linda A. W. wrote:
A great boon to the SuSE release process would be for an upgrade to be able to upgrade from multiple prior releases just as on Windows.
It does work pretty well, depending on how much updating and installing of packages you have done (and how). I have done upgrades with very few problems with skipped versions (i.e I skipped 8.1 and 9.0). To say this is a SuSE limitation is just wrong, and to say it is no problem with Windows is totally false. I'd do an update with Linux any day of the week (across multiple releases or not) vs Windows, especially if you have updated much of the embedded problems/programs of MS (ex. IE or Office).
With SuSE, if you miss 9.2 because it hoses your system, don't expect to be able to cleanly upgrade to 9.3 from 9.1.
That may be your experience but it certainly isn't mine.
You have to go through each intermediate release no matter how bad they are and no matter how badly they may not work on your computer in order to be able to do the update/upgrade feature in Yast[2].
If you are updating your running system via the system update feature of Yast rather than booting from the DVD/CD and upgrading that way, that may be your problem. I have always upgraded via booting from the newest versions media. -- Joe Morris New Tribes Mission Email Address: Joe_Morris@ntm.org Registered Linux user 231871
On Monday 20 December 2004 06:11 pm, Doug B wrote:
On Monday 20 December 2004 05:19 pm, David Johanson wrote:
This has definitely not been my experience as chronicled on this list. What has been surprising to me is the almost total lack of response to the problems I've been detailing such as phantom drives being listed, drives not being found, and apparently total inability to deal with ATAPI zip drives. At this point I'm looking into other distributions. Up through 9.0 I felt like SuSE was THE distribution to own, but I'm beginning to change my opinions more and more with each subsequent release since 9.0
I do have to agree on the zip drive thing. I still haven't looked into that. I rarely use the drive any more.
I finally got around to looking into this. With the old way of do this , the fstab entry looked like: /dev/hdb4 /media/zip vfat user,defaults 0 0 Well, there is no /dev/hdb4 on this machine. every /dev/hdx had a fourth partition expect the one my zip was hung on. I tried create the device, but no luck. Finally I tried /dev/hdb (no partition number) in fstab: /dev/hdb /media/zip vfat user,defaults 0 0 I can now read the disk just fine. It has not been repartitioned or formated. They are the same files on the same partition as when the drive was in a 9.1 box using /dev/hdb4 (actually hdd4 on that other box.) I still think a lot of the flack distros are taking can be traced back to kernel development. Without a 2.7 testing/development branch, things move into the 2.6 kernel too quickly. Have fun! Doug
participants (16)
-
Adam Tauno Williams
-
BandiPat
-
Brad Dameron
-
Chris
-
David Johanson
-
David Rankin
-
Doug B
-
Joe Morris (NTM)
-
Jon Nelson
-
Linda A. W.
-
Luca Botti
-
Mark Crean
-
Peter Nixon
-
Scott Leighton
-
Sid Boyce
-
Steve Kratz