> 2. downloading updates on installation time is annoying. atleast put an
> option to get rid of it.
This is to ensure that you're being exposed to the internet, that your
machine is uptodate with any security fixes between when the CD you have was
released and the present.
Aswell as the normal security updates for the linux kernel and other daemons
this ensures that people still using CDs with the security update that came
out last week will be covered by the time they've finished installing.
There are on the whole very few packages (compared to the whole contents) of
the CD that do need to be updated). If you're not on a network connection
when you install then this step will be missed and you'll be asked to
perform the updates when you do next connect.
There are some plans for a system that should reduce the download size
required massively for updates of the same package... hopefully something
like this will be available in future releases.
> 3. screenserver setup window became very simple. but unusable. no previw, no
> advance settings.
Currently this was a upstream GNOME decision by the person who wrote the
gnome-screen-saver module. A noticable proportion of people have expressed
an interest in being able to configure their screensavers so if the code is
developed (or ported over from 'GtkDemo.c'---the control-panel in
'xscreensaver') then will may change.
> 4. after installing scim-m17n, m17n IMengine is not showing up in scim setup
> window. there are no any information about m17n IM in /usr/lib/scim-1.0
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 11:56:18PM +0000, Paul Sladen wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, மு.மயூரன் wrote:
> > 2. downloading updates on installation time is annoying. atleast put an
> > option to get rid of it.
> This is to ensure that you're being exposed to the internet, that your
> machine is uptodate with any security fixes between when the CD you have was
> released and the present.
> Aswell as the normal security updates for the linux kernel and other daemons
> this ensures that people still using CDs with the security update that came
> out last week will be covered by the time they've finished installing.
I do not believe that this is true; I believe that people must upgrade
manually after installation before creating any other local users (which
is a sensible precaution anyway, since we have fixed other
local-privileges-escalation vulnerabilities since Breezy). Have you
tested this claim to make sure it's really true? I think we need to be
very careful about what we say about this.
One reason I don't think it's true is that the packages in question are
installed as part of the first stage, and, while we might manage to
download updated versions of packages being installed fresh in the
second stage rather than using the versions on the CD, I'm pretty sure
we don't upgrade anything that was currently installed unless versioned
dependencies force us to do so.