[opensuse-factory] Notes on 11.0 Alpha3 installation: Partitioning proposal
New installation of 11.0 a3. Update after configuration of repositories. Machine: VirtualBox running in 32 bit openSUSE 10.3 on Athlon 64. Virtual Memory: 512 MB (further:memory) Virtual Hard disk: 2x 8 GB (further:hard disk, HD) Known bug where installation stops on hard disk probe and known workaround: boot parameter 'hwprobe=-parallel,-misc.par' Installation looks super until it comes to partitioning. Case: Multiple Linux installations or partitions and no more space on hard disk. HD1 was Alpha2 installation. HD2 was valid 10.3 installation. Proposal: Delete existing and create new partitions on HD2. It would be good, if installer discovers 2 Linux installations, to ask which one should be used for installation, instead to propose something just to fill in this part of proposal. Blindly assuming may ruin user work. In this case that would happen by deleting valid 10.3 installation, instead of Alpha2. Though, reversed proposal is not good either as it is possible that I want to keep Alpha2 to check differences. Assuming that installation on second disk is not important, is not good as I can test different distros, and one on HD1 can be the one that I want to overwrite. There is more similar use cases. This can't be decided automatically and user that has 2 Linux installations and no more free space on hard disk knows which one is installation target. No one else in the world can tell that for him. Solution: Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data. -- Regards, Rajko. See http://en.opensuse.org/Portal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 20:30 -0500, Rajko M. wrote: Solution:
Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data.
I agree. I have the same setup you did on my laptop (I haven't gotten
around to using 11.0a3 yet, hopefully this week ;-)) and your proposal
seems reasonable. Especially because unlike a user with two partitions,
a Windows and a Linux/openSUSE, in which it should default to
overwriting the Linux partition, if a user has two Linux partitions
he/she most likely knows what they're doing, and what they want.
Also, *Kevin adding 'try 11.0 alpha this week* to to-do list ;-)
--
Kevin "Yo" Dupuy | Public Mail
On Friday 21 March 2008 09:53:44 pm Kevin Dupuy wrote:
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 20:30 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
Solution:
Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion of his data.
I agree. I have the same setup you did on my laptop (I haven't gotten around to using 11.0a3 yet, hopefully this week ;-)) and your proposal seems reasonable. Especially because unlike a user with two partitions, a Windows and a Linux/openSUSE, in which it should default to overwriting the Linux partition, if a user has two Linux partitions he/she most likely knows what they're doing, and what they want.
Yes, but it doesn't mean that they are always focused to check every letter on the screen, and once they are not they will be sorry. Installing openSUSE is not test how focused one can be, it is just a installation. -- Regards, Rajko. See http://en.opensuse.org/Portal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
On Friday 21 March 2008 09:53:44 pm Kevin Dupuy wrote:
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 20:30 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:
Solution:
Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion of his data. I agree. I have the same setup you did on my laptop (I haven't gotten around to using 11.0a3 yet, hopefully this week ;-)) and your proposal seems reasonable. Especially because unlike a user with two partitions, a Windows and a Linux/openSUSE, in which it should default to overwriting the Linux partition, if a user has two Linux partitions he/she most likely knows what they're doing, and what they want.
Yes, but it doesn't mean that they are always focused to check every letter on the screen, and once they are not they will be sorry.
Installing openSUSE is not test how focused one can be, it is just a installation.
Good advice. One thing that amazed me some weeks ago - I had a bad 11.0 Alpha2 DVD, so I decided to use the 10.3 DVD to do a fresh install on a new HD for a relative, leaving the 10.0 HD in situ so I could copy the user stuff across. 10.3 found it and asked if I wanted to copy the user data across from the 10.0 drive and it did it. First time I'd come across anything like it. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. wrote:
New installation of 11.0 a3. Update after configuration of repositories.
Machine: VirtualBox running in 32 bit openSUSE 10.3 on Athlon 64. Virtual Memory: 512 MB (further:memory) Virtual Hard disk: 2x 8 GB (further:hard disk, HD)
Known bug where installation stops on hard disk probe and known workaround: boot parameter 'hwprobe=-parallel,-misc.par'
Installation looks super until it comes to partitioning.
Case: Multiple Linux installations or partitions and no more space on hard disk. HD1 was Alpha2 installation. HD2 was valid 10.3 installation. Proposal: Delete existing and create new partitions on HD2.
It would be good, if installer discovers 2 Linux installations, to ask which one should be used for installation, instead to propose something just to fill in this part of proposal.
Blindly assuming may ruin user work. In this case that would happen by deleting valid 10.3 installation, instead of Alpha2. Though, reversed proposal is not good either as it is possible that I want to keep Alpha2 to check differences. Assuming that installation on second disk is not important, is not good as I can test different distros, and one on HD1 can be the one that I want to overwrite. There is more similar use cases.
This can't be decided automatically and user that has 2 Linux installations and no more free space on hard disk knows which one is installation target. No one else in the world can tell that for him.
Solution: Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data.
I recently did a 11.0 Alpha2 x86_64 install where 2 HD's were in the box, an new SATA drive and the previous mobo's IDE x86 drive. Partitioning and grub got so confusing that I had to pull the IDE drive to keep matters sane. Alpha2 install went OK as did zypper dup to Alpha3. On another box that was progressively upgraded from 10.2 Alpha0, the 11.2 DVD saw the HD's differently to what grub on the HD's saw, sda on one was sdb on the other and there was sdc as well. I came close to wiping sdb which was the one I wanted to upgrade, while sda was the one I wanted to wipe. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sid Boyce schrieb: | | I recently did a 11.0 Alpha2 x86_64 install where 2 HD's were in the | box, an new SATA drive and the previous mobo's IDE x86 drive. | Partitioning and grub got so confusing that I had to pull the IDE drive | to keep matters sane. Alpha2 install went OK as did zypper dup to Alpha3. | On another box that was progressively upgraded from 10.2 Alpha0, the | 11.2 DVD saw the HD's differently to what grub on the HD's saw, sda on | one was sdb on the other and there was sdc as well. I came close to | wiping sdb which was the one I wanted to upgrade, while sda was the one | I wanted to wipe. | Regards | Sid. So much to the new "easy" and "automagic" installer. I have the same experience with it. I also fully agree to your last post about not copying Ubuntu and importing bad windows security ideas. Just because something has not been exploited yet does not mean it will not be exploited when this has become more used. In this case, a simple "file a bug in bugzilla" won't do it, because the problem is the idea itself (to have a computer working automagically). I believe I have already written enough about it and it becomes repetitive... In my eyes, educating the user and maybe not getting the biggest userbase is not the worst thing at all. It should not be a goal to have the biggest userbase, but to make the distribution the way you want it to be. This is the only way why Linux has become so great (Windows to the other approch). I test 11.0A3 and report bugs - yet, I don't believe any of my live systems will ever see 11.0... Greetings Felix -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH5WSQaQ44ga2xxAoRAtGjAKDIz9LFrbTFdFZUTd44PhN40yiLoQCg1XU5 AGZNVLFJ+wefN5OmTmintI8= =/lT2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Felix-Nicolai Müller wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Sid Boyce schrieb: | | I recently did a 11.0 Alpha2 x86_64 install where 2 HD's were in the | box, an new SATA drive and the previous mobo's IDE x86 drive. | Partitioning and grub got so confusing that I had to pull the IDE drive | to keep matters sane. Alpha2 install went OK as did zypper dup to Alpha3. | On another box that was progressively upgraded from 10.2 Alpha0, the | 11.2 DVD saw the HD's differently to what grub on the HD's saw, sda on | one was sdb on the other and there was sdc as well. I came close to | wiping sdb which was the one I wanted to upgrade, while sda was the one | I wanted to wipe. | Regards | Sid.
So much to the new "easy" and "automagic" installer. I have the same experience with it. I also fully agree to your last post about not copying Ubuntu and importing bad windows security ideas. Just because something has not been exploited yet does not mean it will not be exploited when this has become more used. In this case, a simple "file a bug in bugzilla" won't do it, because the problem is the idea itself (to have a computer working automagically). I believe I have already written enough about it and it becomes repetitive... In my eyes, educating the user and maybe not getting the biggest userbase is not the worst thing at all. It should not be a goal to have the biggest userbase, but to make the distribution the way you want it to be. This is the only way why Linux has become so great (Windows to the other approch). I test 11.0A3 and report bugs - yet, I don't believe any of my live systems will ever see 11.0...
Greetings Felix
There is nothing wrong with having the largest user base, but it should not be gained at the expense of good and essential fundamentals. I know that openSUSE and family are very robust, designed to be deployed in environments where security is important, the tools are as easy as any, citing YaST, zypper and 1-click, just that they are not very widely known on the outside. All the complaints against the distro I've ever read show a lack of SuSE knowledge on the reviewer's part, while hardly a day goes by when you don't see an article about how to do things in Ubuntu, this does help explain and encourage people to try Ubuntu - they can read enough to coax them into having a go. I could imagine a Ubuntu pitch to a corporate customer telling them how simple it was with their distro because root and user shared the same password. All hell would erupt in some, in others, they'd politely promise to call.... Live systems are always going to be tricky in your situation. The best policy would be a long test cycle before deploying live and to have a ready fallback should you hit problems. For many years before I retired, I used RedHat up to 6.2, then switched to SuSE. I always installed the latest and greatest stuff, mainly built locally and I never once had a problem with using my laptop in whatever location, tech support or lecturing situation I was involved in, except once in the Madrid office where I couldn't get an IP address via dhcp, the server complaining that I wasn't using Windows. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sid Boyce schrieb: | There is nothing wrong with having the largest user base, but it should | not be gained at the expense of good and essential fundamentals. I know | that openSUSE and family are very robust, designed to be deployed in | environments where security is important, the tools are as easy as any, | citing YaST, zypper and 1-click, just that they are not very widely | known on the outside. All the complaints against the distro I've ever | read show a lack of SuSE knowledge on the reviewer's part, while hardly | a day goes by when you don't see an article about how to do things in | Ubuntu, this does help explain and encourage people to try Ubuntu - they | can read enough to coax them into having a go. | | I could imagine a Ubuntu pitch to a corporate customer telling them how | simple it was with their distro because root and user shared the same | password. All hell would erupt in some, in others, they'd politely | promise to call.... | | Live systems are always going to be tricky in your situation. The best | policy would be a long test cycle before deploying live and to have a | ready fallback should you hit problems. +1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH5aOvaQ44ga2xxAoRAkljAKC0AHyfOUHD7L0riEEdFx9sEKFVRQCdFCUO MhqK13UNW1fdisXEFmxcM60= =lMb4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Felix-Nicolai Müller schreef:
Sid Boyce schrieb: | There is nothing wrong with having the largest user base, but it should | not be gained at the expense of good and essential fundamentals. I know | that openSUSE and family are very robust, designed to be deployed in | environments where security is important, the tools are as easy as any, | citing YaST, zypper and 1-click, just that they are not very widely | known on the outside. All the complaints against the distro I've ever | read show a lack of SuSE knowledge on the reviewer's part, while hardly | a day goes by when you don't see an article about how to do things in | Ubuntu, this does help explain and encourage people to try Ubuntu - they | can read enough to coax them into having a go. | | I could imagine a Ubuntu pitch to a corporate customer telling them how | simple it was with their distro because root and user shared the same | password. All hell would erupt in some, in others, they'd politely | promise to call.... | | Live systems are always going to be tricky in your situation. The best | policy would be a long test cycle before deploying live and to have a | ready fallback should you hit problems.
+1
+1. I agree on the fact that out of experience shows, that things that work should not be altered, but that the focus must be on things that realy must be improved. Most times it is fatal to change too many at the same time, because if things go bad/wrong, it is difficult to find the 'real' cause. -- Enjoy your time around, Oddball (Now or never...) Besturingssysteem: Linux 2.6.25-rc5-git2-5-default x86_64 Current user: oddball@AMD64x2-sfn1 System: openSUSE 11.0 (x86_64) Alpha3 KDE: 4.00.66 (KDE 4.0.66 >= 20080313) "release 6.1" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Oddball wrote:
Felix-Nicolai Müller schreef:
Sid Boyce schrieb: | There is nothing wrong with having the largest user base, but it should | not be gained at the expense of good and essential fundamentals. I know | that openSUSE and family are very robust, designed to be deployed in | environments where security is important, the tools are as easy as any, | citing YaST, zypper and 1-click, just that they are not very widely | known on the outside. All the complaints against the distro I've ever | read show a lack of SuSE knowledge on the reviewer's part, while hardly | a day goes by when you don't see an article about how to do things in | Ubuntu, this does help explain and encourage people to try Ubuntu - they | can read enough to coax them into having a go. | | I could imagine a Ubuntu pitch to a corporate customer telling them how | simple it was with their distro because root and user shared the same | password. All hell would erupt in some, in others, they'd politely | promise to call.... | | Live systems are always going to be tricky in your situation. The best | policy would be a long test cycle before deploying live and to have a | ready fallback should you hit problems.
+1
+1.
I agree on the fact that out of experience shows, that things that work should not be altered, but that the focus must be on things that realy must be improved. Most times it is fatal to change too many at the same time, because if things go bad/wrong, it is difficult to find the 'real' cause.
My changes are not as drastic as they once were, then I kept a local log of all changes as typically a problem will surface may be a week or two after a change is made. The large IT mainframe shops going way back all have had a Change Control department that documented all proposed and actual changes which were thoroughly discussed in minute detail for possible impact. As a vendor, we were also subjected to the same process and I have had to travel up to 175 miles to explain and discuss any changes we proposed. We found however that the typical Solaris shops were not too good at it and on one occasion a programmer made a change over a weekend and on Monday the system croaked, but it was not until the Tuesday when he came back to work that they discovered the change had been made, he backed it out and the system came up. To demonstrate the thinking, the same customer attended their first Amdahl Share meeting in Copenhagen and on their return they were making fun of how paranoid mainframe customers were. Perhaps the culture has changed as many mainframe shops are now heavily into "Open" systems and staff migrate across the cultures. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Sid Boyce schreef:
My changes are not as drastic as they once were, then I kept a local log of all changes as typically a problem will surface may be a week or two after a change is made. The large IT mainframe shops going way back all have had a Change Control department that documented all proposed and actual changes which were thoroughly discussed in minute detail for possible impact. As a vendor, we were also subjected to the same process and I have had to travel up to 175 miles to explain and discuss any changes we proposed. We found however that the typical Solaris shops were not too good at it and on one occasion a programmer made a change over a weekend and on Monday the system croaked, but it was not until the Tuesday when he came back to work that they discovered the change had been made, he backed it out and the system came up. To demonstrate the thinking, the same customer attended their first Amdahl Share meeting in Copenhagen and on their return they were making fun of how paranoid mainframe customers were. Perhaps the culture has changed as many mainframe shops are now heavily into "Open" systems and staff migrate across the cultures. Regards Sid.
Maybe they misunderstood the responsibility that came with it, and confused it with paranoia...;) Nowadays there seem to be too much agendas. Too many things changing at the same time, will make control on the consequenses more difficult, as you discribe out of reality here. The timeframe and order to change fundamental stuf, is important, to keep grip on the situation. I understand deadlines, but i also understand reality, and haste does not fit in there... What i am trying to say is that time to achieve 'real' changes, may spread 3 GM versions. When major changes might jepperdize a version, try to spread them over 3. There is no need to rush, because others do. Keep sanity. to create a thrustworthy distribution. New, but stable. Like we ourselves want to have it, and not how someone thinks, unexisting, might be newbies, might want to have it, if they would choose... A good distro is. (To Be, or Not To Be.) What does not function, has to be fixed or replaced. What is it we do not like about openSuSE now, that has to change?, exept what doesn't work? -- Enjoy your time around, Oddball (Now or never...) Besturingssysteem: Linux 2.6.25-rc5-git2-5-default x86_64 Current user: oddball@AMD64x2-sfn1 System: openSUSE 11.0 (x86_64) Alpha3 KDE: 4.00.66 (KDE 4.0.66 >= 20080313) "release 6.1" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Oddball wrote:
Sid Boyce schreef:
My changes are not as drastic as they once were, then I kept a local log of all changes as typically a problem will surface may be a week or two after a change is made. The large IT mainframe shops going way back all have had a Change Control department that documented all proposed and actual changes which were thoroughly discussed in minute detail for possible impact. As a vendor, we were also subjected to the same process and I have had to travel up to 175 miles to explain and discuss any changes we proposed. We found however that the typical Solaris shops were not too good at it and on one occasion a programmer made a change over a weekend and on Monday the system croaked, but it was not until the Tuesday when he came back to work that they discovered the change had been made, he backed it out and the system came up. To demonstrate the thinking, the same customer attended their first Amdahl Share meeting in Copenhagen and on their return they were making fun of how paranoid mainframe customers were. Perhaps the culture has changed as many mainframe shops are now heavily into "Open" systems and staff migrate across the cultures. Regards Sid.
Maybe they misunderstood the responsibility that came with it, and confused it with paranoia...;)
Nowadays there seem to be too much agendas. Too many things changing at the same time, will make control on the consequenses more difficult, as you discribe out of reality here. The timeframe and order to change fundamental stuf, is important, to keep grip on the situation. I understand deadlines, but i also understand reality, and haste does not fit in there...
What i am trying to say is that time to achieve 'real' changes, may spread 3 GM versions. When major changes might jepperdize a version, try to spread them over 3. There is no need to rush, because others do. Keep sanity. to create a thrustworthy distribution. New, but stable. Like we ourselves want to have it, and not how someone thinks, unexisting, might be newbies, might want to have it, if they would choose... A good distro is. (To Be, or Not To Be.) What does not function, has to be fixed or replaced.
What is it we do not like about openSuSE now, that has to change?, exept what doesn't work?
The thing I most like about openSUSE is that it is pretty much up to date, which means that if I have to install a new application from sources, I don't have to go on the hunt for a host of new library sources as previously needed for building apps such as Flightgear. It's proof that old isn't necessarily solid or stable. The only thing I would like to see added is OpenSceneGraph which is used by applications other than FlightGear and would be a useful addition for people doing graphical work -- looks like a feature request is due. It's probably understandable what newbies think they need and form a bad opinion of a solid and extensive distro, complaints like too much software, too long to install, long boot up time, difficulty in finding software, etc. I have a friend who is a long time SuSE/openSUSE user, still using 10.2 as he has had problems with anything later, especially in the area of Wifi support, but seemingly with other things also, though one early 10.3 Alpha box seems OK for him. I am puzzled as 10.2 Alpha through to 11.0 Alpha3 have been fine on every box I have. Better Wifi and other hardware support is in later kernels, tools are better. I shall recommend he upgrades his kernel so as not to have to use ndiswrapper, though he says he can't risk any problems with the 10.2 box. I can't help but feel that there is something he is doing that I'm not or vice versa. From his side anything later than 10.2 is a disaster. I must find some time and see for myself the install of the latest openSuSE one one of his boxes. I just can't figure it - possibly a bad DVD writer giving openSUSE a bad name, I have had quite a few fail and only 2 out of 5 here seem OK. Media check works on the box that generated the DVD, then the install on another box fails in strange ways, mainly with file integrity problems. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Am Samstag, 22. März 2008 schrieb Rajko M.:
Solution: Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data.
But we don't want that. So we do an educated guess and if it's wrong, you click a button "create new proposal". If it's right, there is nothing to be pressed. Greetings, Stephan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 24 March 2008 09:50:25 am Stephan Kulow wrote:
Solution: Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data.
But we don't want that. So we do an educated guess and if it's wrong, you click a button "create new proposal". If it's right, there is nothing to be pressed.
Educated guess has some logic behind. What can be logic behind pointing for deletion installation with released version that can contain user work, custom settings, installed programs and data, that is not replaceable, instead of Alpha version. I can see simple logic to delete the oldest version that user probably want to replace, but there is also possibility that user expects that one of installations will be resized to create space for new. Just as we a careful with windows, we can be with other Linux distributions. Missing warning what we are going to do right in the proposal window, in plain text and language, can lead to really unpleasant surprises if user misread partitions /dev/sdXN. Something like: "WARNING: Installer will delete openSUSE 10.3 installation on /dev/sdXN, to create space for new installation." is much better than only: "Delete /dev/sdXN. Create ......" How many Ubuntu users you expect to carefully read and understand current text on first attempt to install openSUSE? Most of them are not far from windows logic to simply accept installer proposal and later deal with details. If they rely on such logic, and openSUSE installer wipes their Ubuntu, in majority of cases we will never hear about their (failed) attempt to use openSUSE, but their friends and relatives will. I still find question the best, if not only option, in cases with multiple choices, where some of them will delete user data. -- Regards, Rajko http://en.opensuse.org/Portal needs helpful hands to organize it and maintain. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Rajko M. schreef:
On Monday 24 March 2008 09:50:25 am Stephan Kulow wrote:
Solution: Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data.
But we don't want that. So we do an educated guess and if it's wrong, you click a button "create new proposal". If it's right, there is nothing to be pressed.
Educated guess has some logic behind. What can be logic behind pointing for deletion installation with released version that can contain user work, custom settings, installed programs and data, that is not replaceable, instead of Alpha version.
I can see simple logic to delete the oldest version that user probably want to replace, but there is also possibility that user expects that one of installations will be resized to create space for new. Just as we a careful with windows, we can be with other Linux distributions.
Missing warning what we are going to do right in the proposal window, in plain text and language, can lead to really unpleasant surprises if user misread partitions /dev/sdXN. Something like: "WARNING: Installer will delete openSUSE 10.3 installation on /dev/sdXN, to create space for new installation." is much better than only: "Delete /dev/sdXN. Create ......"
How many Ubuntu users you expect to carefully read and understand current text on first attempt to install openSUSE? Most of them are not far from windows logic to simply accept installer proposal and later deal with details. If they rely on such logic, and openSUSE installer wipes their Ubuntu, in majority of cases we will never hear about their (failed) attempt to use openSUSE, but their friends and relatives will.
I still find question the best, if not only option, in cases with multiple choices, where some of them will delete user data.
I agree on this. Many times it anoyed me, that other linux distro's were not seen as what they are. So i have to write all partitions down on a piece of paper, to be certain not to delete or install on the wrong partition. I think sophisticated software can respect even Linux distro's as M$. -- Enjoy your time around, Oddball (Now or never...) Besturingssysteem: Linux 2.6.25-rc5-git2-5-default x86_64 Current user: oddball@AMD64x2-sfn1 System: openSUSE 11.0 (x86_64) Alpha3 KDE: 4.00.66 (KDE 4.0.66 >= 20080313) "release 6.1" --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Oddball wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008 09:50:25 am Stephan Kulow wrote:
Solution: Ask before you give proposal. This will help openSUSE to prevent user from accidental deletion his data. But we don't want that. So we do an educated guess and if it's wrong, you click a button "create new proposal". If it's right, there is nothing to be pressed.
Educated guess has some logic behind. What can be logic behind pointing for deletion installation with released version that can contain user work, custom settings, installed programs and data, that is not replaceable, instead of Alpha version. I can see simple logic to delete the oldest version that user probably want to replace, but there is also possibility that user expects that one of installations will be resized to create space for new. Just as we a careful with windows, we can be with other Linux distributions. Missing warning what we are going to do right in the proposal window, in plain text and language, can lead to really unpleasant surprises if user misread partitions /dev/sdXN. Something like: "WARNING: Installer will delete openSUSE 10.3 installation on /dev/sdXN, to create space for new installation." is much better than only: "Delete /dev/sdXN. Create ......"
How many Ubuntu users you expect to carefully read and understand current text on first attempt to install openSUSE? Most of them are not far from windows logic to simply accept installer proposal and later deal with details. If they rely on such logic, and openSUSE installer wipes their Ubuntu, in majority of cases we will never hear about their (failed) attempt to use openSUSE, but their friends and relatives will. I still find question the best, if not only option, in cases with multiple choices, where some of them will delete user data. I agree on this. Many times it anoyed me, that other linux distro's were not seen as what
Rajko M. schreef: they are. So i have to write all partitions down on a piece of paper, to be certain not to delete or install on the wrong partition. I think sophisticated software can respect even Linux distro's as M$.
This made me break out into a hearty chuckle. Not many days ago I was installing Kubuntu 8.04 beta 6 in a VirtualBox VM, when up came a message which could only be interpreted as Kubuntu WILL "wipe any partitions you already have". I read it several times and though logic says it wouldn't happen, I could not put any other interpretation on it. If I wasn't installing into a VM, I would have stopped right there - SCARY! even for a seasoned Linux hand. Language has to be precise in these matters and it means putting yourself in the position of the target audience - it's learned from feedback such as you provide, things that are clear to the developer can cause confusion and catastrophic consequence to other developers and users, even one wrongly worded sentence can do it. I once gave operator training - with my well prepared notes and slides - to a large company's mainframe ops where it's customary for them to set up an operating procedure handbook that they all work from, shock horror when they asked me to proof read the document - thoughts such as "I never said that" kept running through my head and extensive modifications had to be made. Now being made wiser, subsequent training took on a different slant. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support Specialist, Cricket Coach Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
Felix-Nicolai Müller -
Kevin Dupuy -
Oddball -
Rajko M. -
Sid Boyce -
Stephan Kulow