Unfortunately, this is incorrect. SGI announces the release of the
updated installer once it's completed. They also make it available for
download, via their web site. When the installer is ready, anyone who is
interested in using it has at least 2 methods of finding out about
it...the linux-xfs list and the web site. And let us not forget about the
list archives, which are searchable.
Which contradict what I said in what way?
>> The issue is that it's already been discussed and people should read
>> that it HAS been discussed .."
end quote me
The part which reads:
They just want itm and if they don't ask, they won't know.
End quote you
Actually, from where I'm sitting if I put both my statements back in the
correct order again they seem to say the same you're saying. :)
Let me rephrase what I wrote: "If they don't ask, they won't know, but
they should know it's been asked before and hence not ask. They should
simply read that it's coming (or not)". Clearer?
Stefan is correct though, its not SGI's responsibility to rewrite
everyones installer, thats the vendor's responsibility, or its your
own responsibility. nobody should be expecting SGI to do it like they
are obligated, they aren't. remember this is a port of XFS to the
Linux kernel, NOT a port of XFS to redhat.
Yes and no, XFS is a kernel issue, true (and some userspace fluff). But
also, SGI have supplied installer isos for three consecutive RedHat
distros. Don't be surprised people are SO happy with it that they
request a new one ported to the latest RedHat.
But those same people, who know that the installer has been put together
for the last 3 releases, can take it on pretty good faith that an
installer for this version will be forthcoming.
I'm sorry, are you agreeing or disagreeing with me here. You have me
The next statement should have given you the indication. I'm disagreeing
that they need to request the next version be updated...already using the
product, from a previous installer, and being members of this list and
having read the previous threads, they should already know that it's
forthcoming and should need to ask.
Ok, well, I disagree with the implicit assumption that there will be an
installer made. Don't get me wrong. I want one to come forth, it's just
that it shouldn't be 100% assumed they will. I even believe they said at
one point there was NO work being done on the installer. I believe it
was Nathan who said that but I could be mixing it up.
quote someone else then Nathan:
> When will there be ISO images for RedHat 7.3 please ?
When someone from the community makes one.
And I read "community" as not being SGI themselves :)
Notice the difference between request and demand please.
Request is a single request. Demand is a clamoring for the item. See
the difference between what you think is a request and what appears to be
the reality of a demand situation.
Again, is 3 people submitting a request 3 people submitting a request or
I have seen a few requests for an installer. I cannot say I've seen a
demand for it.
But it hasn't been 3 people...it's been more (and no, I haven't saved all
the threads, so I don't have an accurate count, at this time).
I know there's been more, that was again an example :)
Not keeping count? What do you do all day ? :)
IF they choose to make one. They have indicated there is work in that
Exactly...they have indicated that it is being worked on. How are
repeated requests for a deadline or release date going to help, when, as
is the case with any development process, end dates can't really be pinned
down without looking like fools if the dates are missed?
Being a software developer for several years I know :)
It doesn't really matter. Like we've all said...it'll be out when it's
out, and will be announced at that time, right?