2008/12/24 Rajko M. <rmatov101@charter.net>:
On Wednesday 24 December 2008 05:13:16 am Vincent Untz wrote:
Le mercredi 24 décembre 2008, à 01:04 +0100, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Problems in development release that scare 99% of todays users:
1) boot configuration setup is black box, there is no list of supported (to that moment tested) boot configurations. Actually there is no public specification what should go in this list: partitions, file system, permanent storage, (anything else)
Do you mean specific advice for Factory? Because there is a Wiki page on what "boot configurations" are known to work reliably eg) small ext2 in primary or logical partition.
2) kernel will not boot on certain hardware, how to debug this. Reporting this requires a lot of text to be copied, once you make to the usable configuration. Some simple numeric indicator like line number, or breakpoint number will help much more. It is easy to note on the paper, and easy to post. Splash screen during first phase of development that can have kernel crashes, should be forbidden.
I like the "No Splash!" idea :) Often an older Live CD will boot, and allow info to be collected, in a pleasant way. Perhaps a special Network Install disk, with logging set up to go to another machine would help testers?
3) X crashes, and nothing tells that Failsafe option offers a GUI (it should be named "Failsafe Graphic Mode")
Please make a simple obvious way to get to text mode, it may not be something you'ld market, but it'd be help a lot when sleuthing troubles, on forum and such.
4) will not log in default desktop, or desktop crashes, but alternative to change desktop is in the login screen at the bottom left corner, but how many will click on barely visible text (kdm). This is good for release. Please make life of a tester easier, and provide list, not drop down menu,
I filed a Bugzilla on that already (useability). https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461690 If you'ld care to check it over and add any comments.
6) Uaesrs need fallback options to usable alternatives, example is what Knoppix and derivatives offer on a boot screen. Press function key and get list of cheat codes, or other kernels that can be used to boot a system. Later, when all seems to work OK, that can be removed.
Actually yes; GREAT POINT!!! What is wrong with including the 11.0 kernel on the ISO disk, for the installation, so that it can work, to the point where the ISO's can install an updated kernel from the net. That would reduce the effect of kernel driver regressions.
Development should be focused as much as it is possible. Today we test new kernel, tomorrow X, or libc, or whatever, and so on. Having to debug interaction between change in libc and the rest of the system can mean a lot of work, but it is easier then what we have now.
Yes, I like to have kernel, gcc or glibc change, or new application software, but not two of those at same time.
It is nice to have many new kernel features included, but if that means broken result, what is use of those features?
In old SuSE days, it was not unknown to ship with multiple kernel versions eg) 2.0 and 2.2; or 2.2 and 2.4.0 kernel (SuSE 7.1).
Probably some testing of skills provided by openSUSE will help to get a picture what can be tested by community and what methods and tools have to be provided as a help. Reliance on unknown number of testers, with unknown skills will not move us from current status where number of hidden errors grows.
openSUSE isn't responsible for testing all the packages, thoroughly. Things like gcc, perl, come with a test suite, which aid packagers. Really the distro needs to do configuration and integration testing. There's not much point having 100 ppl, installing X.Y into Virtual Box, and all saying "yes it's fine". Perhaps online update could use a stored hwinfo/smolt profile, to appeal for testers for the new release in a more targetted way; rather than have it installed on clone-like systems.
Then slow down a bit whole process, please. I barely had time to download and install some releases and it already was time for a new one, before I had setup to test with. I don't think that I'm special in this respect.
That's clear, the schedule discussion and feedback in general from 90% of ppl is that 6 months is too short. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org