On Wednesday, 29 October 2008 at 13:42, Brian Wheeler wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 14:34 +0200, shmuel siegel wrote:
> Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > I'm going to agree with the -1.
> >
> > Almost all of the "reasons" from the original email boil down to
"we've
> > always done it this way".
> >
> >
> And what about the other reasons?
>
> There have been two reasons given for maintaining the change.
> 1) Your use case doesn't interest me.
> 2) We've thought of a way to accomplish our goal. There have been no
> responses to the question if other methods would accomplish the same
> objective.
>
I'm still trying to figure out why there's all the love for X on tty7.
Things change. We adapt. Having the primary interface on tty1 makes
much more sense than it being on tty7. On a semi-serious note, the tty7
choice is a historical accident...not a design choice.
OSS has been replaced.
Static /dev has been replaced.
Which has the downside of losing devices I create manually upon reboot.
SysV init has been replaced.
And there was much screaming. Custom inittabs stopped working.
IDE drives aren't /dev/hd* anymore.
That was relatively painless if you used labels.
We're using LVM instead of raw partitions.
Thankfully anaconda still lets you use raw partitions. Who said I need LVM?
I don't see any advantages in using it.
You forgot about NetworkManager, which still doesn't work right, 4 releases
after it was introduced.
Oh and PackageKit, which presents a different set of groups than what you
can see in Anaconda.
Regards,
R.
--
Fedora
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion
http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer
http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"