[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: FC3 disappointment: KsCD locks system; grip; CDROM in general.



tor, 11.11.2004 kl. 17.21 skrev Kim Lux:
> I added hdc=ide-scsi to the boot command in grub.  I can now manually
> eject cdroms (ie eject scd0 from Konsole.)  Right clicking the desktop
> CDROM icon does NOT work.  grip now works as well.  
> 
> 
> At least I've got CDROM access again. 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 08:41 -0700, Kim Lux wrote:
> > Fedora Core 3 is an outstanding OS except for a few (sometimes very big)
> > flaws.  
> > 
> > I've got big problems with KsCD, CDROM access in general and grip.
> > There were messages on the list about uDev problems with CDROMs before
> > the release.  Why did we announce a big FC3 release when these problems
> > weren't fixed ?  I fear that this sort of thing gives Linux in general a
> > big fat black eye 
> > 
> > CDROM access:  CDROM access on my computers has been iffy ever since
> > upgrading to FC3 (ie FC3t3, FC3rc3, FC3rc5, FC3 Final.)  Clicking CDROM
> > in devices in KDE's File Manager used to give me mounting error
> > messages, but I used to be able to mount CDROMs manually.  With FC3
> > Final, I have absolutely no CDROM access.  I cannot eject a CDROM
> > without rebooting.  Needless to say, this is a big pain.  I think this
> > is entirely unacceptable in a final release. 
> > 
> > KsCD: has always been a troublesome app.  It will now lock my machine up
> > entirely if I play a CD with scratches on it.  Either KsCD needs to be
> > fixed or it shouldn't ship with Fedora anymore.  How can we keep shiping
> > an application that is so buggy ?  I've hated KsCD since RH8 for issues
> > where it locks up the computer or interferes with other devices needing
> > access to the CDROM.    
> > 
> > grip: is now totally incapacitated.  It crashes with a segmentation
> > fault at start up.  The first day I installed FC3, it ripped half a
> > dozen CDs very well.  Then it hit a CD with scratches and it has gone
> > into some sort of loop that it can't get out of, not even with
> > rebooting.
> > 
> > While I am very happy with FC3 in general, I am very disappointed with
> > the fact that these large problems remained in a final version.  I know
> > there was pressure for the team to keep up with the schedule, but was it
> > worth shipping a distro that is now going to cause a lot of people a lot
> > of headaches ?
> > 
> > I've got mixed feelings about the whole Fedora effort.  I'm not sure
> > that its mandate is in sync with users.  Is its focus on producing a
> > good, stable, usable distro for everyday use by run of the mill Linux
> > users or is it to push out Linux technology ASAP so that it gets
> > tested ?  
> > 
> > I guess I've got the feeling that FC3 went out the door a bit early and
> > could have used another 2 weeks of testing and bug fixes.  I'm sure that
> > the team adhered to the "it doesn't wreck any data" criteria, but I
> > think there are a few areas in FC3 that should have been polished a bit
> > more before it went out the door. 
> > 
> > I've got a suggestion: I think that Fedora should continue its "bleeding
> > edge" mentality and that it should strive to ship 2-3 releases a year.
> > However, I think there should be sub releases in between releases that
> > do nothing but make the previous release perfect.
> > 
> > For example, I think the team should start working on a Fedora 3.1
> > release that fixes CDROM access, sound and a few other issues that seem
> > to remain in this release.  The goal should be a near perfect release
> > before the team focuses on Fedora Core 4.  CDROM access will need to be
> > fixed prior to FC4, so why not gather that and other fixes and put them
> > in another release ?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Kim Lux (Mr.)  Diesel Research Inc
> > 
> -- 
> Kim Lux (Mr.)  Diesel Research Inc

Sure it isn't fam running loose again? like in FC1?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]